DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of claims
Claims 1, 3, 10, 14, 16 have been amended
Claims 1-20 are pending in the instant application
Claims 1-20 are rejected in the instant application
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection. The amendments filed 12/29/24 changed the scope of the claims, based on the amendments a change in reference(s) was required.
USC 112(b) rejections regarding claims 2, 5, 11, 13, 18 and 19 regarding 112(b) have been withdrawn per the amendments and arguments filed in the instant application.
USC 112(b) rejection regarding indefiniteness directed to claims 16-20 with regards to invoking 112f and being rejected under 112(b) is maintained. Applicant states that the term ‘means’ or ‘step for’ are not utilizes, applicant is advised that a processing ‘unit’ is a generic placeholder and the term does not specifically have to be ‘means for’. Examiner maintains his rejection.
Examiner kindly suggests prior to filing a response, the applicant set up a formal interview with the examiner such that details about specific limitations can be clarified inventive concept clearly defined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 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(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
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.
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: “one or more processing units to determine” in claim 16. 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.
Claims 16-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
For a computer-implemented means-plus-function claim limitation that invokes 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, the corresponding structure is required to be more than simply a general purpose computer or microprocessor. See Aristocrat, 521 F.3d 1328, 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2008). The corresponding structure for a computer-implemented function must include the algorithm as well as the general purpose computer or microprocessor. See WMS Gaming, Inc., 184 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The written description of the specification must at least disclose the algorithm that transforms the general purpose microprocessor to a special purpose computer programmed to perform the disclosed algorithm that performs the claimed function. Aristocrat at 1338. Applicant may express the algorithm in any understandable terms including as a mathematical formula, in prose, in a flow chart, or in any other manner that provides sufficient structure. See Finisar Corp., 523 F.3d 1323, 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is appropriate if the written description of the specification discloses no corresponding algorithm. Aristocrat at 1337-1338. For example, merely referencing to a general purpose computer with appropriate programming without providing any detailed explanation of the appropriate programming, see Id. at 1334, or simply reciting software without providing some detail about the means to accomplish the function, would not be an adequate disclosure of the corresponding structure to satisfy the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, even when one of ordinary skill in the art is capable of writing the software to convert a general purpose computer to a special purpose computer to perform the claimed function. See Finisar, 523 F.3d at 1340-1341. ***
The above cited rejections are merely exemplary.
The Applicant(s) are respectfully requested to correct all similar errors.
Claims not specifically mentioned are rejected by virtue of their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-6, 9-13, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poonamalli et al. (US20150339117A1) hereinafter Poonamalli in view of Poiesz et al. (US20150248284A1) hereinafter Poiesz.
Regarding claim 1. Poonamalli teaches a processor comprising:
one or more circuits to:
identify a component installed within a platform (¶0033 device profile module 118 can include a variety of other information, such as identifiers for the component devices 104);
determine, based on one or more component properties, a capability classification for the component (¶0036 the computing device authorities 126 can tailor the update targeting information 128 to specify custom update configurations for various types and/or classifications of computing devices and ¶0038 the computing device authority 200 is the manufacturer “Acme,” which manufactures several models of a “Dale” computer, including the model “XC1101.” For this particular device profile, the update targeting information 202 specifies particular mappings of component devices to device driver versions);
generate an index entry for the component, including at least an identifier and the capability classification (Fig.2 and ¶0038 mapping of update targeting information to the update groups 1 and ¶0051 profile information can be considered as well, such as component device identifiers, software identifiers, firmware identifiers, basic input/output system (BIOS) identifiers, and so forth);
determine the capability classification is less than fully sufficient (¶0057 changes in computing device profile information associated with particular updates can be changed in the update targeting information.);
and
store the index entry and one or more supplemental update entries for the component (Fig.2 and ¶0038 mapping of update targeting information to the update groups 1)
Poonamalli teaches populate one or more supplemental update entries for the component (¶0057 The changes in the update targeting information 128 can be propagated to the update service 112, which can make corresponding changes to the update groups 1. Thus, when a computing device affected by the changes in the device profile information queries for updates, the computing device may be reassigned to a different update group 1)
Poonamalli however does not explicitly teach component corresponding to at least one of a secondary component or secondary information used, by the component, to implement or more updates
Poiesz however in the same field of computer networking teaches component corresponding to at least one of a secondary component or secondary information used, by the component, to implement or more updates (¶0007 see updating components on a computing device. The system may include a means for receiving, at a computing device, a notification of an update corresponding to an existing component on the computing device. Additionally, the system may further include a means for, responsive to receiving the notification, receiving inputs from a plurality of sensors of the computing device, and the inputs provide information indicative of a given state of use, time of day, and location associated with the computing device. The system may also include a means for, based on a weighted combination of the inputs, determining whether to update the existing component on the computing device, and based on the determination, a means for updating the existing component)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of computer networking at the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the updates of Poonamalli and the teachings of Poiesz for using component corresponding to at least one of a secondary component or secondary for updates to combine the teachings such that Poonamalli utilizes the components prior to updating software. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the results of the combination are predictable because each element in the combination is merely performing the same function it would perform separately. One would be motivated to combine these teachings because doing so will automate component update process (¶0018 Poiesz).
Regarding claim 2. Poonamalli teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein the capability classification includes at least one of partially sufficient, supplicant, fully dependent, or virtual (Poonamalli ¶0035 see the update service 112 can coordinate propagation of an update (e.g., via upload and/or download) directly from an update authority 120 to the computing device 102. Thus, the update service 112 can store drivers and/or updates locally on the service for propagation to various computing devices, and/or the update service 112 can serve as a broker for enabling appropriate updates to be propagated to various computing devices, e.g., directly from the update authorities 120).
Regarding claim 3. Poonamalli teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein the one or more circuits are further to:
receive a firmware update request for the component (Poonamalli ¶0006 see computing device can provide profile information for the computing device, such as an identifier of a manufacturer for the computing device, a make identifier for the computing device, a model identifier, and so forth. The update service can inspect the profile information, and can match the profile information to a corresponding update group.);
determine, using the index entry, the capability classification (Poonamalli Fig 2 ¶0038 see a mapping of update targeting information to the update groups 116, generally at 200. In the upper portion, a computing device authority 200 specifies update targeting information 202. For example, the computing device authority 200 is the manufacturer “Acme,” which manufactures several models of a “Dale” computer, including the model “XC1101.” For this particular device profile, the update targeting information 202 specifies particular mappings of component devices to device driver versions, e.g., Device1 corresponds to a Driver version);
determine, based at least on the capability classification, that the firmware update will use the one or more supplemental update entries (Poonamalli ¶0051 see matches the profile information to an update group. For example, a manufacturer, make, and/or model indicated by the profile information can be matched to one of the update groups 116 that specifies the same manufacturer, make, and/or model. Other profile information can be considered as well, such as component device identifiers, software identifiers, firmware identifiers, basic input/output system (BIOS) identifiers); and
cause the firmware update to execute using the one or more supplemental update entries (Poonamalli ¶0048 see If an update is available (“Yes”), step 304 receives the update).
Regarding claim 4. Poonamalli teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein the capability classification is associated with an on-component capability to perform at least one of a protection operation, a detection operation, or a recovery operation (Poonamalli ¶0034 see Update authorities 120 are further illustrated, which are representative of entities that can issue various types of updates. Examples of the update authorities [capability class] 120 include device manufacturers (e.g., for the component devices 104), software developers (e.g., for the applications 108), and/or other entities that can develop and/or issue updates for various components and functionalities. For example, the update authorities 120 can generate driver updates 122, which are representative of drivers that can be used to update the device drivers 106. The update authorities 120 can also generate software updates 124, which are representative of updates for the applications 108 and/or other software).
Regarding claim 5. Poonamalli teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein the one or more circuits are further to:
receive a firmware update request for the component (Poonamalli ¶0050 see Step 400 receives a query for updates that includes profile information for a computing device);
determine the capability classification corresponds to a partially sufficient component (Poonamalli ¶0050 see update service 112, for instance, can receive a query from the update module 110 asking whether updates to various functionalities of the computing device 102 are available. The query can include profile information for the computing device 102, such as a manufacturer, make, model, and so forth); and
retrieve update information from one or more off-component memory locations (Poonamalli Fig 4 element 406 ¶0054 see step 406 causes the update to be propagated to the computing device.).
Regarding claim 6. Poonamalli further teaches the processor of claim 1,
wherein the one or more circuits are further to:
receive a firmware update request for the component (Poonamalli Fig 4. - ¶0050 see receives a query for updates that includes profile information for a computing device);
determine the capability classification corresponds to a supplicant component (Poonamalli ¶0051 see Step 402 matches the profile information to an update group. For example, a manufacturer, make, and/or model indicated by the profile information can be matched to one of the update groups 116 that specifies the same manufacturer, make, and/or model);
validate the firmware update using one or more off-component services (Poonamalli ¶0053 see Step 404 ascertains whether an update is available for the update group. The update service 112, for instance, can ascertain that an update has been made available to the update group subsequent to a previous update session between the update service and the computing device 102); and
retrieve update information from one or more off-component memory locations (Poonamalli ¶0054 see If an update is available (“Yes”), step 406 causes the update to be propagated to the computing device. The update, for instance, can be downloaded to the computing device 102 from the update service 112 and/or one of the update authorities 120).
Regarding claim 9. Poonamalli teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein the processor is comprised in at least one of:
a system for performing simulation operations; a system for performing simulation operations to test or validate autonomous machine applications; a system for performing digital twin operations; a system for performing light transport simulation; a system for rendering graphical output; a system for performing deep learning operations; a system implemented using an edge device; a system for generating or presenting virtual reality (VR) content; a system for generating or presenting augmented reality (AR) content; a system for generating or presenting mixed reality (MR) content; a system incorporating one or more Virtual Machines (VMs); a system for performing operations for a conversational AI application; a system for performing operations for a generative AI application; a system for performing operations using a language model; a system for performing one or more generative content operations using a large language model (LLM); a system implemented at least partially in a data center; a system for performing hardware testing using simulation; a system for performing one or more generative content operations using a language model; a system for synthetic data generation; a collaborative content creation platform for 3D assets; or a system implemented at least partially using cloud computing resources (Poonamalli ¶0080 see the central computing device may be a cloud of one or more server computers that are connected to the multiple devices through a network).
Regarding claim 10. Poonamalli teaches a computer-implemented method (¶0087: methods that may be implemented to perform techniques discussed herein), comprising:
receiving a firmware (FW) update request associated with a component forming at least part of a platform (¶0006: a computing device can query an update service for available updates. and ¶0005: firmware updates);
determining one or more capabilities associated with the component (¶0036: the computing device authorities 126 can tailor the update targeting information 128 to specify custom update configurations for various types and/or classifications of computing devices and ¶0038: the computing device authority 200 is the manufacturer “Acme,” which manufactures several models of a “Dale” computer, including the model “XC1101.” For this particular device profile, the update targeting information 202 specifies particular mappings of component devices to device driver versions);
obtaining, based at least on an identifier associated with the component, the supplemental update information (¶0057: The changes in the update targeting information 128 can be propagated to the update service 112, which can make corresponding changes to the update groups 116. Thus, when a computing device affected by the changes in the device profile information queries for updates, the computing device may be reassigned to a different update group 116. And Fig.2 and ¶0038: mapping of update targeting information to the update groups 116 and ¶0051: profile information can be considered as well, such as component device identifiers, software identifiers, firmware identifiers, basic input/output system (BIOS) identifiers, and so forth.); and
causing a FW update associated with the FW update request to be installed for the component using, at least, the supplemental update information (¶0036: the computing device authorities 126 can tailor the update targeting information 128 to specify custom update configurations for various types and/or classifications of computing devices).
Poonamalli teaches determining, based at least on the one or more capabilities, supplemental update information for the component and the FW update request (¶0057: changes in computing device profile information associated with particular updates can be changed in the update targeting information.)
Poonamalli however does not explicitly teach component including to at least one of a secondary component or secondary information associated with the request
Poiesz however in the same field of computer networking teaches component including to at least one of a secondary component or secondary information associated with the request (¶0007 see updating components on a computing device. The system may include a means for receiving, at a computing device, a notification of an update corresponding to an existing component on the computing device. Additionally, the system may further include a means for, responsive to receiving the notification, receiving inputs from a plurality of sensors of the computing device, and the inputs provide information indicative of a given state of use, time of day, and location associated with the computing device. The system may also include a means for, based on a weighted combination of the inputs, determining whether to update the existing component on the computing device, and based on the determination, a means for updating the existing component)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of computer networking at the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the updates of Poonamalli and the teachings of Poiesz for using component corresponding to at least one of a secondary component or secondary for updates to combine the teachings such that Poonamalli utilizes the components prior to updating software. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the results of the combination are predictable because each element in the combination is merely performing the same function it would perform separately. One would be motivated to combine these teachings because doing so will automate component update process (¶0018 Poiesz).
Regarding claim 11. Poonamalli further teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 10, further comprising:
receiving a second FW update request for a second component forming at least part of the platform (Poonamalli ¶0050 see Step 400 receives a query for updates that includes profile information for a computing device. The update service 112, for instance, can receive a query from the update module 110 asking whether updates to various functionalities of the computing device 102 are available. The query can include profile information for the computing device 102, such as a manufacturer, make, model, and so forth [process works on multiple computing devices as can be seen in Fig 2]);
determining one or more second capabilities associated with the second component (Poonamalli ¶0051 see Step 402 matches the profile information to an update group. For example, a manufacturer, make, and/or model indicated by the profile information can be matched to one of the update groups 116 that specifies the same manufacturer, make, and/or model. Other profile information can be considered as well, such as component device identifiers, software identifiers, firmware identifiers, basic input/output system (BIOS) identifiers, and so forth); and
determining the one or more second capabilities define the second component as a fully sufficient component (Poonamalli ¶0053 see Step 404 ascertains whether an update is available for the update group. The update service 112, for instance, can ascertain that an update has been made available to the update group subsequent to a previous update session between the update service and the computing device 102); and
causing the FW update to be installed for the component (Poonamalli ¶0054 see If an update is available (“Yes”), step 406 causes the update to be propagated to the computing device. The update, for instance, can be downloaded to the computing device 102 from the update service 112 and/or one of the update authorities 120).
Regarding claim 12. Poonamalli teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 10,
wherein the one or more capabilities are associated with at least a protection operation, a detection operation, or a recovery operation (Poonamalli ¶0034 see Update authorities 120 are further illustrated, which are representative of entities that can issue various types of updates. Examples of the update authorities [capability class] 120 include device manufacturers (e.g., for the component devices 104), software developers (e.g., for the applications 108), and/or other entities that can develop and/or issue updates for various components and functionalities. For example, the update authorities 120 can generate driver updates 122, which are representative of drivers that can be used to update the device drivers 106. The update authorities 120 can also generate software updates 124, which are representative of updates for the applications 108 and/or other software)
Regarding claim 13. Poonamalli further teaches computer-implemented method of claim 10, further comprising:
defining a capability level for the component, the capability level including at least one of fully sufficient, partially sufficient, supplicant, fully dependent, and virtual (Poonamalli ¶0035 see the update service 112 can coordinate propagation of an update (e.g., via upload and/or download) directly from an update authority 120 to the computing device 102. Thus, the update service 112 can store drivers and/or updates locally on the service for propagation to various computing devices, and/or the update service 112 can serve as a broker for enabling appropriate updates to be propagated to various computing devices, e.g., directly from the update authorities 120).
Regarding claim 15. Poonamalli further teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 10, further comprising:
identifying a new component associated with the platform; receiving validation information associated with the new component; and generating an index entry for the new component, including at least an identifier and a new component capability classification (Poonamalli ¶0046 see update module 110 can query the device profile module 118 for profile information for the computing device 102. As referenced above, the profile information can include a manufacturer, make, and/or model of a computing device. The profile information can also include other information, such as identifiers for the component devices 104, identifiers for the applications 108, identifiers for other functionalities of the computing device 102 (e.g., a firmware version), and so on – see Fig 2 as well – [examiners note: adding data/entries into authorities is commonly understood feature to add data into tables]).
Regarding claim 16. Poonamalli teaches a system, comprising:
one or more processing units (¶0070: processing system 704 is illustrated as including hardware element 710 that may be configured as processors) to determine a component capability level responsive to receiving an update request for a component (¶0006 : a computing device can query an update service for available updates and ¶0005: firmware updates and ¶0081: Each of the multiple devices may have different physical requirements and capabilities and Fig.2 and ¶0038: mapping of update targeting information to the update groups 116 and ¶0051: profile information can be considered as well, such as component device identifiers, software identifiers, firmware identifiers, basic input/output system (BIOS) identifiers, and so forth.) and to obtain, based at least on the component capability level and index information for the component, supplemental update information to perform the update (¶0057: changes in computing device profile information associated with particular updates can be changed in the update targeting information.)
Poonamalli does not explicitly teach including at least one of a secondary component or secondary information used
Poiesz however in the same field of computer networking teaches including at least one of a secondary component or secondary information used (¶0007 see updating components on a computing device. The system may include a means for receiving, at a computing device, a notification of an update corresponding to an existing component on the computing device. Additionally, the system may further include a means for, responsive to receiving the notification, receiving inputs from a plurality of sensors of the computing device, and the inputs provide information indicative of a given state of use, time of day, and location associated with the computing device. The system may also include a means for, based on a weighted combination of the inputs, determining whether to update the existing component on the computing device, and based on the determination, a means for updating the existing component)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of computer networking at the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the updates of Poonamalli and the teachings of Poiesz for using component corresponding to at least one of a secondary component or secondary for updates to combine the teachings such that Poonamalli utilizes the components prior to updating software. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the results of the combination are predictable because each element in the combination is merely performing the same function it would perform separately. One would be motivated to combine these teachings because doing so will automate component update process (¶0018 Poiesz).
Regarding claim 17. Poonamalli further teaches system of claim 16,
wherein the component capability level corresponds to an ability of the component to execute at least one of a protection operation, a detection operation, or a recovery operation using on-component resources (Poonamalli ¶0034 see Update authorities 120 are further illustrated, which are representative of entities that can issue various types of updates. Examples of the update authorities [capability class] 120 include device manufacturers (e.g., for the component devices 104), software developers (e.g., for the applications 108), and/or other entities that can develop and/or issue updates for various components and functionalities. For example, the update authorities 120 can generate driver updates 122, which are representative of drivers that can be used to update the device drivers 106. The update authorities 120 can also generate software updates 124, which are representative of updates for the applications 108 and/or other software)
Regarding claim 18. Poonamalli further teaches system of claim 16,
wherein the component capability level corresponds to one of fully sufficient, partially sufficient, supplicant, fully dependent, and virtual (Poonamalli ¶0035 see the update service 112 can coordinate propagation of an update (e.g., via upload and/or download) directly from an update authority 120 to the computing device 102. Thus, the update service 112 can store drivers and/or updates locally on the service for propagation to various computing devices, and/or the update service 112 can serve as a broker for enabling appropriate updates to be propagated to various computing devices, e.g., directly from the update authorities 120).
Regarding claim 19. Poonamalli further teaches system of claim 16,
wherein the index information is populated by a platform manufacturer and is rooted within a resilience engine of a platform including the component (Poonamalli ¶0036 see computing device authorities 126, which are representative of entities that can make various update decisions for computing devices. For example, the computing device authorities 126 can include an OEM for the computing device 102. The computing device authorities 126 maintain update targeting information 128, which specifies update information and statuses for particular classes and/or categories of computing devices. For instance, the computing device authority 126 can generate update targeting information 128 that specifies that computing devices that meet a particular profile (e.g., manufacturer, make, model, component device profile, and so on) are to receive particular updates, and/or are not to receive other updates. Thus, the computing device authorities).
Regarding claim 20. Poonamalli further teaches the system of claim 16,
wherein supplemental update information includes at least one of a validation key, a measurement operation, or an off-component storage location (Poonamalli ¶0085 see The cloud 720 includes and/or is representative of a platform 722 for resources 724. The platform 722 abstracts underlying functionality of hardware (e.g., servers) and software resources of the cloud 720. The resources 724 may include applications and/or data that can be utilized while computer processing is executed on servers that are remote from the computing device 702)
Claims 7, 8, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poonamalli-Poiesz in view of Klische (US2018/0336024A1) Klische.
Regarding claim 7. Poonamalli-Poiesz teaches the processor of claim 1,
wherein the one or more circuits are further to:
receive, from an authority associated with the platform, updated parameters for the component (Poonamalli Fig 6 element 600 | ¶0034 see Update authorities 120 are further illustrated, which are representative of entities that can issue various types of updates. Examples of the update authorities 120 include device manufacturers (e.g., for the component devices 104), software developers (e.g., for the applications 108), and/or other entities that can develop and/or issue updates for various components and functionalities);
update the index entry based on the updated parameters for the component (Poonamalli ¶0007 see Update information associated with the corresponding update group can be synchronized with the computing device. For instance, updates associated with the corresponding update group can be propagated to the computing device).
Poonamalli-Poiesz does not explicitly teach authenticate the authority
Klische however in the same field of computer networking teaches authenticate the authority (¶0049 see Before the software is placed into each update package, in accordance with one embodiment of the present disclosure the software update packager 210 may authenticate the provider of the software update. This may be done by verifying the signing certificate associated with the software update to ensure it was signed by the expected entity)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of computer networking at the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the computing authority of Poonamalli and the teachings of Klische for authenticating the computing authority to combine the teachings such that Poonamalli authenticates the computing authority prior to updating software. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the results of the combination are predictable because each element in the combination is merely performing the same function it would perform separately. One would be motivated to combine these teachings to ensure the proper functioning of the components (¶0027 Klische).
Regarding claim 8. The already combined references teach the processor of claim 7,
Poonamalli further teaches wherein the authority is at least one of a manufacturer of the platform or an owner of the platform (Poonamalli ¶0034 see Update authorities 120 are further illustrated, which are representative of entities that can issue various types of updates. Examples of the update authorities 120 include device manufacturers (e.g., for the component devices 104), software developers (e.g., for the applications 108), and/or other entities that can develop and/or issue updates for various components and functionalities)
Regarding claim 14. Poonamalli-Poiesz teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 10, further comprising:
receiving, from an authority associated with the platform, updated parameters for the component (Poonamalli Fig 6 element 600 | ¶0034 see Update authorities 120 are further illustrated, which are representative of entities that can issue various types of updates. Examples of the update authorities 120 include device manufacturers (e.g., for the component devices 104), software developers (e.g., for the applications 108), and/or other entities that can develop and/or issue updates for various components and functionalities);
updating an index entry corresponding to the component based on the updated parameters for the component (Poonamalli ¶0007 see Update information associated with the corresponding update group can be synchronized with the computing device. For instance, updates associated with the corresponding update group can be propagated to the computing device).
Poonamalli-Poiesz does not explicitly teach authenticate the authority
Klische however in the same field of computer networking teaches authenticate the authority (¶0049 see Before the software is placed into each update package, in accordance with one embodiment of the present disclosure the software update packager 210 may authenticate the provider of the software update. This may be done by verifying the signing certificate associated with the software update to ensure it was signed by the expected entity)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of computer networking at the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the computing authority of Poonamalli and the teachings of Klische for authenticating the computing authority to combine the teachings such that Poonamalli authenticates the computing authority prior to updating software. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the results of the combination are predictable because each element in the combination is merely performing the same function it would perform separately. One would be motivated to combine these teachings to ensure the proper functioning of the components (¶0027 Klische).
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
References are cited not only for their quoted language but for all that they teach.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Atta Khan whose telephone number is 571-270-7364. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 09:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vivek Srivastava can be reached on (571) 272-7304. 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.
/ATTA KHAN/
Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights