DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to Applicant Arguments and Remarks filed on March 25, 2026.
The amendments filed on March 25, 2026 have been acknowledged and considered.
Claims 1 and 11 have been amended. Claims 10 and 21 have been canceled. Claim 23 is new.
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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's Remarks, filed March 25, 2026, has been fully considered and entered.
Accordingly, Claims 1 and 11 have been amended. Claims 10 and 21 have been canceled. Claim 23 is new. Claims 1-9, 11-20 and 22-23 are pending in this application. Claims 1 and 11 are independent claims. In light of applicant amendments, the objection to the specification and the 101 rejection of claim 21 for being directed to an abstract idea have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 11-18, filed January 21, 2026, with respect to the amendments of independent claims 1 and 11 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1: Applicant argues “that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not find motivation to combine Wang (and Adrian) with Petousis to achieve the prioritized data transfer, because Wang focuses on a direct connection between the storage device and a server. As a result, there are no limited communication resources in Wang and no reason or motivation to prioritize data transfer for such direct connection based on the reasoning in Petousis. Specifically, a person of ordinary skill in the art - based on the teachings of Petousis - would only be motivated to use prioritized data transfer if the communication or connection means between the storage device and server were not consistent or reliable… Applicant asserts that any suggestion of prioritized data transfer in the system of Wang would be based on impermissible hindsight reconstruction… As such, Wang, Adrian and Petousis, taken alone or in combination, do not disclose, teach or suggest… the processor prioritizing the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server based on a priority list such that the autonomous vehicle sensor data is transferred in an order of priority of the priority list, as recited in independent claim 1 (and similarly recited in independent claim 11).”
Response to Argument 1: Examiner respectfully disagrees. Petousis is not limited to unreliable wireless connection, Petousis [0063-0066] teaches that the transmission can be made over a direct wired connection and applying its priority ordering when a fast reliable link becomes available. (See Petousis [0063-0066] “Transmitting message data is preferably performed by a transmitter (e.g., transmission module) of the vehicle using a wireless network (e.g., 3G, 5G, LTE, Wi-Fi, etc.), a wired connection (e.g., an Ethernet connection while the vehicle is parked), a combination of wireless networks and wired connections, or by any suitable communication module over any suitable data connection… detecting… that a high bandwidth uplink is available, and retrieving low priority data of a large size from the low priority buffer and transmitting it over the high bandwidth uplink.” The availability of a good connection in Petousis does not avoid the prioritization scheme, it determines which priority tier is obtained from the buffers.
Wang’s [0003] objective is not just completing the transfer “but also that researchers can access and analyze the data timely and efficiently”. A direct connection is not an infinite bandwidth connection, and Wang’s goal would not be met if high value data is queued behind during data transmission. Petousis [0016] teaches the technique to allow “for critical or other high-value data to have preferential real-time transmission”. Thus, because the reason to combine is obtained from the references themselves, the rejection is not based on hindsight. See rejection below.
Additionally, claims 1 and 11 only require that the transfer be prioritized based on a priority list such that the data is transferred in an order of priority of that list. Thus, the argument is not commensurate in scope with the claims.
Therefore, the Examiner has determined that this argument is not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 8-9, 11-13, 16-17, 19-20 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US Patent Application Publication No. US 20210320804 A1), in view of Adrian (US Patent Application Publication No. US 20160202738 A1), in view of Petousis (US Patent Application Publication No. US 20200410787 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a transfer station for receiving a plurality of removable storage devices storing autonomous vehicle sensor data and transferring the autonomous vehicle sensor data to a remote data storage server, comprising: a plurality of bays, each of the plurality of bays (i) including a port, and (ii) being configured to receive a removable storage device storing autonomous vehicle sensor data; and a computing system, including: a memory storing an authentication and decryption engine, a physical server node, and a processor in communication with the memory, the physical server node, and the port of each of the plurality of bays, the processor: (See Wang [0020-0022] “a system for data transfer [e.g. transfer station] and storage is provided. The system may include: a first server and a terminal device. The terminal device may include at least one device processor… directed to: encrypt data generated by the terminal device; store duplicated copies of the encrypted data [e.g. storing autonomous vehicle sensor data] respectively in a first storage device and a second storage device [e.g. plurality of removable storage devices], which are removably inserted into the terminal device… The first server [e.g. physical server node] may include at least one first server processor… the first storage device may be physically transported to a remote location of the first server and inserted [Thus, being configured to receive a removable storage device storing autonomous vehicle sensor data] into the first server… the at least one first server processor may be further directed to: decrypt the first storage device… the at least one first server processor or the at least one second server processor may be further directed to… configure the first storage device and second storage device with a Redundant Array of Independent Disks (RAID) storage arrangement” See also Wang [0056] “the first server 110 may be a… server group. The server group [e.g. physical server nodes] may be centralized or distributed (e.g., the first server 110 may be a distributed system)… the first server 110 may be local or remote. See also Wang [0072-0075, 0077] “FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram illustrating exemplary hardware… the first server 110 and/or the second server 130 may be implemented on the computing device 200… The computing device 200 may further include… a read only memory (ROM) 230, or a random access memory (RAM) 240, for storing various data files to be processed and/or transmitted by the computing device 200… also include an I/O component 260 [e.g. bays including a port], supporting input/output between the computing device 200 and other components therein… The processing device 112 of the first server 110 may include an acquisition module 310, a decryption module 320, a verification module 330 [e.g. authentication and decryption engine]” See also Wang [0065-0067] “the terminal device 140 may include an autonomous vehicle (e.g., an unmanned robot)… the terminal device 140 (e.g., the unmanned robot) may also include a plurality of detection units configured to detect driving information associated with the terminal device 140. The plurality of detection units may include a camera… an acceleration sensor (e.g., a piezoelectric sensor), a velocity sensor (e.g., a Hall sensor) [e.g. autonomous vehicle sensor data]… the terminal device 140 may generate data associated with the driving information… the terminal device 140 may encrypt the generated data” See also Wang [0109] “the first storage device and/or the second storage device may include a mass storage, a removable storage, or the like, or any combination thereof… may include a magnetic disk, an optical disk, a hard disk drive, a solid-state drive, or the like.”
Examiner notes that a server which configures multiple inserted storage devices (e.g. hard disk drives) with a Redundant Array of Independent Disks (RAID) storage arrangement, must have a plurality of bays, each of the plurality of bays including a port, and being configured to receive a storage device.)
However, Adrian teaches a plurality of bays, each of the plurality of bays (i) including a port, and (ii) being configured to receive a removable storage device in more details. (See Adrian [0026-0030] “an Information Handling System (IHS) [e.g. transfer station for receiving a plurality of removable storage devices] may include any instrumentality or aggregate of instrumentalities operable to compute, calculate, determine, classify, process, transmit, receive, retrieve… An IHS may include Random Access Memory (RAM), one or more processing resources such as a Central Processing Unit (CPU)… an IHS may be a… server (e.g., blade server or rack server), a network storage device… an IHS may be part of an information storage network… using one or more storage arrays… systems and methods described herein provide a modular dense storage array” See also Adrian [0005, 0044-0045] “a modular storage array may include a chassis configured to receive a plurality of drive bay modules [Thus, receiving in a bay (e.g. a bay and a second bay) of a transfer station]… Drive bay modules 104/106 [Thus, a plurality of bays, each of the plurality of bays] include bottom-planes 300/301, respectively. In some implementations, each bottom-plane may be a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) having a plurality of connectors [Thus, including a port]. Also, each of the plurality of connectors may be configured to receive a corresponding one of the pluralities of storage drives [Thus, being configured to receive a removable storage device] in that particular drive bay module… each of drive bay module(s) 104/106 may be hot-swappable [Thus, removable storage devices], such that they may be added [Thus, determining that removable storage device (e.g. second removable storage device) is in communication with the computing system via a port of the bay (e.g. second port of the second bay)] and/or removed from chassis 101 without interrupting the operation of storage controller(s) 108 or other elements in the storage array.”)
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang which uses a system for data transfer that includes a server which configures multiple inserted storage devices (e.g. hard disk drives) with a Redundant Array of Independent Disks (RAID) storage arrangement, to incorporate the teachings of Adrian which uses an Information Handling System operable for processing, receiving and transmitting, and includes a modular storage array configured to receive a plurality of hot-swappable drive bay modules, such that they may be added and/or removed without interrupting the operation of controllers or elements in the storage array.
One would be motivated to do so to minimize downtime, ensuring high availability by preventing disruptions.
Wang further in view of Adrian, [hereinafter Wang-Adrian] additionally disclose decrypting a removable storage device using the authentication and decryption engine upon connection of the removable storage device to a port of one of the plurality of bays, (See Wang [0020-0021] “the first storage device may be physically transported to a remote location of the first server and inserted into the first server [Thus, upon connection of the removable storage device (e.g. second removable storage device) to a port of one of the plurality of bays]… the at least one first server processor may be further directed to: decrypt the first storage device [Thus, decrypting a removable storage device]” See also Wang [0077-0079] “ The processing device 112 of the first server 110 may include an acquisition module 310, a decryption module 320, a verification module 330, a generation module 340, a transmission module 350, and a storage module 360… the decryption module 320 may decrypt a first storage device and/or a second storage device. As another example, the decryption module 320 may decrypt data stored in the first storage device and/or the second storage device. [Thus, upon determining that the removable storage device (e.g. second removable storage device) is in communication with the computing system]”)
authenticating the removable storage device using the authentication and decryption engine upon decryption of the removable storage device, and (See Wang [0020-0021, 0029] “generate a message authentication code associated with the encrypted data; and transmit the message authentication code to the first server… the at least one first server processor may be directed to: determine whether the encrypted data stored in the first storage device are damaged using the message authentication code… the at least one first server processor may be further directed to: decrypt the first storage device [e.g. removable storage device / second removable storage device] before determining whether the encrypted data stored in the first storage device are damaged… the message authentication code may include a Message Digest 5 (MD5) code” See also Wang [0159-0160] “In 903, the processing device 112 (e.g., the verification module 330) may determine whether the encrypted data stored in the first storage device are damaged using the message authentication code… after the first storage device is inserted into the first server and/or is decrypted, the processing device 112 may generate a second MD5 code associated with the encrypted data. The processing device 112 may determine whether the encrypted data stored in the first storage device are damaged by comparing the second MD5 code and the first MD5 code [Thus, automatically authenticating the removable storage device (e.g. second removable storage device) upon decryption]” See also Wang [0114] “As used herein, the message authentication code may refer to a short piece of information used to authenticate a message (or data).”
Examiner notes that Message Authentication Codes (MACs) are used to validate the authenticity (provenance) and integrity of data. For further clarification see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_authentication_code)
transferring the autonomous vehicle sensor data stored on the removable storage device to a remote data storage server upon authenticating the removable storage device; (See Wang [0056] “the first server 110 may be a… server group. The server group may be centralized or distributed (e.g., the first server 110 may be a distributed system). In some embodiments, the first server 110 may be local or remote [e.g. remote data storage server].” See also Wang [0163, 0180] “In response to a determination that the encrypted data stored in the first storage device are not damaged [Thus, upon authenticating the removable storage device (e.g. second removable storage device)], process 900 may proceed to operation 905. In 905, the processing device 112 (e.g., the transmission module 350) may transmit [Thus, automatically] the encrypted data from the first storage device to the first server… the first server (e.g., the processing device 112) may store the encrypted data in one or more storage devices (e.g., the storage device 150). [Thus, transferring the autonomous vehicle sensor data stored on the removable storage device to a remote data storage server upon authenticating the removable storage device (e.g. second removable storage device)].” See also Wang [0068] “the storage device 150 may include a mass storage, a removable storage, a volatile read-and-write memory, a read-only memory (ROM), or the like, or any combination thereof.”)
Wang-Adrian does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor prioritizes the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server based on a priority list such that the autonomous vehicle sensor data is transferred in an order of priority of the priority list.
However, Petousis teaches wherein the processor prioritizes the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server based on a priority list such that the autonomous vehicle sensor data is transferred in an order of priority of the priority list. (See Petousis abstract, [0013] “prioritizing vehicle sensor data includes identifying a level of importance for each of a plurality of vehicle sensor data types included in the vehicle sensor data; generating a vehicle sensor data schedule, wherein generating the vehicle data schedule includes… (i) identifying a transmission order for each of the plurality of vehicle sensor data types… converting… the vehicle sensor data types of the vehicle sensor data to a messaging format based on the prioritization; and transmitting… the message data according to the vehicle sensor data schedule … transmitting the data to the remote computing system [e.g. the remote data storage server] according to the schedule [Thus, prioritizes the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data]” See also Petousis [0022, 0033] “The vehicle system includes a processing system (e.g., graphical processing unit or GPU, central processing unit or CPU) as well as memory… The remote computing system can include a user device… a remote server, a cloud server, or any other suitable local and/or distributed computing system remote from the vehicle… prioritizing the vehicle sensor data according to the determined prioritization scheme can include determining the priority based on the data contents… can also include ranking vehicle data types according to data category (e.g., ranking critical data ahead of operational data, and operational data ahead of user application data)… prioritization based on data content includes ranking the relative priority of the vehicle sensor data, based on preferences specified in the prioritization request (e.g., prioritization request). As such, preferences can include an explicit ranked list of vehicle data types, a ranked list of categories of vehicle data [i.e. a priority list (Thus, prioritizes the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data based on a priority list)]” See also Petousis [0071] “the scheduling module schedules vehicle sensor data based on the metadata, and when vehicle sensor data is scheduled for transformation and/or transmission it is retrieved from a vehicle sensor data buffer (e.g., a messages buffer) and/or other memory (e.g., SSD storage [e.g. from the removable storage device])” See also Petousis [0051] “Determining transmission order can be based on prioritization (e.g., higher priority vehicle sensor data can be designated for transmission first, and thus transferred to a buffer designated for high priority transmission and/or transferred to the transformation module directly) [Thus, transferred in an order of priority of the priority list]”)
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang-Adrian, which decrypts, authenticates and transfers autonomous vehicle generated data from a physically transported removable storage device to a server storage, to incorporate the teachings of Petousis of prioritizing autonomous vehicle sensor data based on a ranked list of data types/categories and transmitting the data in the order of priority.
One would be motivated to do so to allow for critical or other high-value data to have preferential real-time transmission, precluding low-value data from consuming limited communication resources (Petousis [0016]).
Regarding claim 2, Wang-Adrian further in view of Petousis [hereinafter Wang-Adrian-Petousis] teaches all limitations and motivations of claim 1, wherein the processor transfers autonomous vehicle sensor data stored on each of a plurality of removable storage devices to the remote data storage server simultaneously upon decrypting and authenticating each of the plurality of removable storage devices. (See Wang [0078-0082] “the acquisition module 310 may receive a message authentication code (e.g., a Message Digest 5 (MD5) code) generated by the terminal device 140… The decryption module 320 may be configured to decrypt one or more components of the data transfer and storage system 100, and/or data and/or information associated with the data transfer and storage system 100. For example, the decryption module 320 may decrypt a first storage device and/or a second storage device [Thus, upon decrypting each of the plurality of removable storage devices]. As another example, the decryption module 320 may decrypt data [e.g. autonomous vehicle sensor data stored on each of a plurality of removable storage devices] stored in the first storage device and/or the second storage device. The verification module 330 may be configured to verify information associated with the data transfer and storage system 100… the verification module 330 may verify whether the encrypted data are transmitted without flaw based on the message authentication code [Thus, upon decrypting and authenticating each of the plurality of removable storage devices]… the transmission module 350 may transmit (encrypted) data from a first storage device to the first server 110 [e.g. remote data storage server] in response to a determination that (encrypted) data stored in the first storage device are not damaged.” See also Wang [0051] “The flowcharts used in the present disclosure illustrate operations that systems implement according to some embodiments of the present disclosure. It is to be expressly understood, the operations of the flowcharts may be implemented… simultaneously.” See also Wang [0155-015] “FIG. 9 is a flowchart illustrating an exemplary process for transmitting data generated by a terminal device… In 901, the processing device 112 (e.g., the acquisition module 310) may receive a message authentication code generated by a terminal device (e.g., the terminal device 140)… In 903, the processing device 112 (e.g., the verification module 330) may determine whether the encrypted data stored in the first storage device are damaged using the message authentication code (i.e., the message authentication code received in 901)… In 905, the processing device 112 (e.g., the transmission module 350) may transmit the encrypted data [e.g. simultaneously]”)
Regarding claim 5, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 1. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 1 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all limitations and motivations of claim 1, wherein the processor automatically deletes the autonomous vehicle sensor data stored on the removable storage device upon confirming that all desired autonomous vehicle sensor data has been transferred to the remote data storage server. (See Wang [0185] “after complete transmission of the encrypted data from the first storage device to the first server [Thus, upon confirming that all desired autonomous vehicle sensor data has been transferred to the remote data storage server], the processing device 132 (e.g., the resetting module 490) may reset the first storage device and the second storage device [Thus, automatically deletes the autonomous vehicle sensor data stored on the removable storage device].” See also Wang [0144] “As used herein, “reset a storage device” may refer to a process of clearing the data stored in the storage device and/or bringing the storage device to its initial state”)
Regarding claim 8, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all limitations and motivations of claim 1, wherein the autonomous vehicle sensor data includes a plurality of packets, each of the plurality of packets has a respective topic associated therewith, and the processor prioritizes the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server based on topic. (See Petousis abstract, [0013, 0017] “A system and method that includes collecting vehicle sensor data [e.g. autonomous vehicle sensor data], wherein prioritizing vehicle sensor data includes identifying a level of importance for each of a plurality of vehicle sensor data types included in the vehicle sensor data… identifying a transmission order for each of the plurality of vehicle sensor data types [Thus, prioritizes the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data]… the method can include… scheduling transmission of the vehicle data type based on the new priority, and transmitting the data to the remote computing system according to the schedule… the method prioritize data based on the packet content, not just the packet header. [Thus, the autonomous vehicle sensor data includes a plurality of packets]” See also Petousis [0030-0033, 0071] “determining the priority can include ranking the vehicle sensor data according to a remote query, and selectively overruling the ranking specified by the remote query according to the data category [e.g. topic]… Ranking vehicle data types can additionally or alternatively be performed within a data category according to data contents or characteristics (e.g., originating sensor type, compressibility, raw data stream or block size, etc.)… prioritization based on data content includes ranking the relative priority of the vehicle sensor data, based on preferences specified in the prioritization request… the scheduling module schedules vehicle sensor data based on the metadata, and when vehicle sensor data is scheduled for transformation and/or transmission it is retrieved from a vehicle sensor data buffer (e.g., a messages buffer) and/or other memory (e.g., SSD storage)[e.g. removable storage device]. [Thus, prioritizes the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server based on topic]”
Examiner notes that based on the Specification paragraph [0078] “all data recorded to the removable storage devices 210 can be segmented by topic, e.g., radar data, LiDar data, images, videos, sound recordings, temperature data, etc.”, the broadest reasonable interpretation of “topic” may be a data category.)
Regarding claim 9, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all limitations and motivations of claim 1, wherein information relating to the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server including a status of the transfer is accessible by the computing system via a web interface. (See Wang [0122, 0137] “the operator of the data transfer and storage system 110 may log in the data management system… the login operator may initiate a request for downloading a specific data file… The data management system may return the URI (e.g., a URL) based on the request [Thus, accessible by the computing system via a web interface]. If the login operator clicks the URL, the data management system may invoke the HDFS proxy… As used herein, a URL (also referred to as a web address) may refer to a reference to a web resource that specifies its location on a computer network and a mechanism for retrieving it… an operator of the data transfer and storage system 100 (e.g., an operator of the terminal device 140 or the second server 130) may record a first transportation service request for transporting the first storage device to the location of the first server in the data management system. After the first storage device is transported to the location of the first server, an operator of the first server may set the status [Thus, including status] of the transportation as “completed” [Thus, information relating to the transfer of the autonomous vehicle sensor data from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server] in the data management system.”)
Regarding claim 11, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 1 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 1 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 1 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 1 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 2 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 2 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 13.
Regarding claim 16, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 5 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 5 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 6 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 6 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 8 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 8 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 9 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 9 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 20.
Regarding claim 22, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all of the elements of claim 1 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 1 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 22.
Claims 3-4 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang-Adrian-Petousis in view of Miller (US Patent Application Publication No. US 20140089683 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all limitations and motivations of claim 1, wherein the processor decrypts the removable storage device using a master key that is capable of decrypting a plurality of removable storage devices each having a different encryption key. (See Wang [0097] “the decryption module 510 may decrypt the first storage device and/or the second storage device [Thus, decrypting a plurality of removable storage devices] by using a key [e.g. master key].”
Wang-Adrian-Petousis does not explicitly disclose each having a different encryption key.
However, Miller teaches decrypts storage device using a master key that is capable of decrypting a plurality of storage devices each having a different encryption key in more details. (See Miller [0054] “ Storage controller 315 may be coupled to storage devices 325A-N [e.g. removable storage devices], which are representative of any number and type (e.g., flash-based memory, solid state drive (SSD), disk) of storage devices. The data stored on each of storage devices 325A-N may be encrypted with a device-specific key [Thus, each having a different encryption key], and then each device-specific key may be encrypted using a master key and secret sharing scheme as discussed above. As a result, the data stored on any of the storage devices 325A-N may be decrypted only if enough of the shares are available to reconstruct the shared (master) secret [Thus, using a master key that is capable of decrypting a plurality of removable storage devices]”
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang-Adrian-Petousis which decrypts storage devices by using a key, to incorporate the teachings of Miller which encrypts each storage device with a device-specific key, where each device-specific key is encrypted using a master key.
One would be motivated to do so to simplify encryption key management, thus improving operational efficiency and security controls.
Regarding claim 4, Wang-Adrian-Petousis further in view of Miller teaches all limitations and motivations of claim 3, wherein the master key is received by the computing system from a remote management system. (See Wang [0058] “the first server 110 may be a server set in an Internet Data Center (IDC)… the first server 110 may control or manage [e.g. remote management system] the operations of the computing device(s) and/or the storage device(s) in the IDC.” See also Wang [0158] “the key [e.g. master key] may be obtained by the processing device 112 [e.g. computing system from a remote management system]”
Regarding claim 14, Wang-Adrian-Petousis further in view of Miller teaches all of the elements of claim 3 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 3 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, Wang-Adrian-Petousis further in view of Miller teaches all of the elements of claim 4 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 4 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 15.
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang-Adrian-Petousis in view of Coughlin (US Patent Application Publication No. US 20190012272 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all limitations and motivations of claim 1, wherein the processor: generates a manifest of desired files to be transferred from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server. (See Wang [0007, 0168] “the method may further include: generating one or more metafiles [e.g. manifest] associated with the encrypted data… a metafile may refer to a file that describes or specifies one or more other files [e.g. generates a manifest of desired files to be transferred from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server]. The metafile may contain metadata, which defines the other file(s) and gives a summary of what data the other file(s) contain… may include mean(s) of creation of the data, purpose of the data, time and date of creation, creator or author of the data, location on a computer network where the data was created, standard(s) used, file size(s), data quality, source of the data, process used to create the data, or the like.” See also Wang [0122] “the operator of the data transfer and storage system 110 may log in the data management system… the data management system may generate a uniform resource identifier (URI) (e.g., a uniform resource locator (URL)) [e.g. index] based on one or more metafiles [e.g. manifest] associated with the specific data file. The data management system may return the URI (e.g., a URL) based on the request. If the login operator clicks the URL, the data management system may invoke the HDFS proxy. The HDFS proxy may determine information associated with the specific data file (e.g., file type, file name, file location, file size, or the like) by resolving the URL”)
However, Coughlin teaches generates a manifest of desired files to be transferred from a storage device to a remote data storage server in more details. (See Coughlin [0014-0016] “a sender who wants to have his or her data uploaded to a remotely accessible storage device [e.g. remote data storage server], such as a network storage device may store the data on a portable storage device [e.g. removable storage device], such as an internal hard drive, external USB hard drive, flash memory device, or compact disc, among other possibilities. The sender may create a manifest that includes an identifier of a destination or storage location… the sender may electronically transmit the manifest to a provider of the network storage device… a method is provided for authenticating a storage device. The method may include receiving, from a sender, a manifest. The manifest may identify a destination. The method may further include validating a format of the manifest and transmitting, to the sender, a device identifier. The method may further include receiving the storage device from the sender. The storage device may have a digital signature stored thereon. A transfer station may read the digital signature from the storage device. The method may further include validating the digital signature, retrieving the manifest based on the device identifier, and authorizing, based on the validation of the digital signature, a transfer of one or more files from the storage device via the transfer station to the destination identified in the manifest [Thus, generates a manifest of desired files to be transferred from the removable storage device to the remote data storage server].” See also Coughlin [0058] “the manifest may include additional information, such as one or more content types for files, metadata, instructions to ignore certain files (e.g., ignore files with a particular extension), and may specify storage locations for certain files (e.g., all files of type “.jpg” should be uploaded to a folder named “/images/”).”)
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang-Adrian-Petousis which generate metafiles [e.g. manifest] associated with files being processed by a data transfer and storage system, to incorporate the teachings of Coughlin which create a manifest used to transfer of one or more files from a storage device via a transfer station to a destination identified in the manifest.
One would be motivated to do so to effectively specify particular files to transfer, thus optimizing the process, saving time and resources.
Regarding claim 18, Wang-Adrian-Petousis further in view of Coughlin teaches all of the elements of claim 7 in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 7 applies equally as well to those elements of claim 18.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang-Adrian-Petousis in view of Green (US Patent Publication No. US 7394651 B2).
Regarding claim 23, Wang-Adrian-Petousis teaches all limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Adrian [0044] teaches that “each of the plurality of connectors may be configured to receive a corresponding one of the pluralities of storage drives [e.g. the port of the bay]”
Wang-Adrian-Petousis does not explicitly disclose wherein the removable storage device includes a flange configured to receive a fastener therethrough for engagement with one of the plurality of bays.
However, Green teaches wherein the removable storage device includes a flange configured to receive a fastener therethrough for engagement with one of the plurality of bays, such engagement securing the removable storage device within the port of one of the plurality of bays to prevent inadvertent removal of the removable storage device from the port. (See Green claim 1, col. 4, lines 51-54 “computer peripheral device [e.g. removable storage device] side bracket mountable on an exterior side wall of a computer peripheral device… The computer peripheral device 42 can be any of a number of different devices, including but not limited to… Removable HD” See also Green col. 4, lines 1-9 “Each of the computer peripheral device side brackets 10 includes a perpendicularly extending engagement panel 14 that extends from the top of the vertical panel 12 [e.g. a flange]… The engagement panel 14 also includes a screw hole 18 for receiving a screw [e.g. the flange received a fastener therethrough]” See also Green col. 5, lines 37-43 “The screw hole 18 in the engagement panel 14 of each computer peripheral device side bracket 10 registers with the screw hole 38 in the engagement panel 34 of each drive bay bracket 30. Hence, only a single locking element 48 each, which in the embodiment of FIG. 6 is a self-locating screw or other type of screw, may be used to engage the screw holes 18 and 38 [e.g. the fastener passes through the flange and engages the bay].” See also Green Fig. 4, col. 5, lines 10-11 “The drive bay brackets 30 are integral to the drive bay 50 [e.g. for engagement with the bay]” See also Green claim 1 “locks a first of said pair of computer peripheral device side brackets to a first of said pair of drive bay brackets and prevents relative movement therebetween [e.g. the engagement secures the removable storage device in its seated position in the bay]” See also Green col. 3, lines 9-11 “securing of the computer peripheral device in a manner that meets computer peripheral device shock and vibration requirements but employs relatively few screws [Thus, prevent inadvertent removal of the removable storage device]”)
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang-Adrian-Petousis, in which a removable storage device is transported and received in a bay for data transfer, to incorporate the teachings of Green of securing the device in the bay by a screw passing through a flange on the device and engaging into a screw hole in the bay.
One would be motivated to do so to secure the device against shock and vibrations avoiding potential data transfer failures.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSCAR WEHOVZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3362. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am - 5:00pm ET.
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, APU M MOFIZ can be reached at (571) 272-4080. 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.
/OSCAR WEHOVZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2161
/APU M MOFIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2161
