Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/797,729

Method, Computer Program, Apparatus and Computer System for Launching at least one Boot Loader

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 08, 2024
Examiner
BAE, JI H
Art Unit
2176
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Drivelock SE
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
630 granted / 768 resolved
+27.0% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
795
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§103
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§102
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
§112
36.0%
-4.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 768 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Europe on 10 August 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the European application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 is rejected as being indefinite because of the following limitation in lines 6-7: “…hosting, by the operating system kernel, an Unified Extensible Firmware Interface, UEFI, emulation environment…” The construction of this limitation makes it unclear whether it should be interpreted as a listing of multiple items, or as a single item. The claim should be amended to appropriately clarify the limitation. For example: “…hosting, by the operating system kernel, an Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) emulation environment…”. Line 8 of claim 1 (“launching…”) may also be indefinite depending on the intended interpretation of lines 6-7, as “the UEFI emulation environment” may lack proper antecedent basis. Claim 2 is rejected as being indefinite for the limitation “the computer system”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as there is no prior original recitation of “a computer system” in claim 2 or its parent. Claims 4-6, 8, 9, 11-13 employ the same language and are rejected on the same basis. Claim 6 is rejected as being indefinite for the limitation “a subsequent boot loader”. Claim 1 has already provided an original recitation of “at least one subsequent boot loader”. It is therefore unclear whether the “subsequent boot loader” in claim 6 is a reference to this limitation, or establishing a new boot loader. Claim 6 is also rejected as being indefinite for the limitation “the hardware of the computer system”. “The computer system” lacks proper antecedent basis; therefore “the hardware” of the computer system also lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 9 is rejected as being indefinite for the limitation “the functionality provided by the UEFI of the computer system”. “The computer system” lacks proper antecedent basis; therefore “the functionality” and “the UEFI” of the computer system also lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 2, 5, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Warkentin et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0195484. Regarding claim 1, Warkentin discloses a computer-implemented method for launching at least one boot loader, the method comprising: launching an emulation environment boot loader [Fig. 1: hypervisor 118; para. 0033: “…hypervisor 118 initializes virtual platform 150 for a VM 120 in response to VM power on…”]1, wherein the emulation environment boot loader comprises an operating system kernel [Fig. 1: kernel 134] that is launched as part of the emulation environment boot loader; hosting, by the operating system kernel, an Unified Extensible Firmware Interface, UEFI, emulation environment [para. 0026: “Virtual platform 150 includes a virtual firmware 144 (e.g., a… unified extensible firmware interface (UEFI) firmware).”]; and launching, inside the UEFI emulation environment, at least one subsequent boot loader [para. 0026: “Virtual firmware 144 performs initialization of virtual platform 150 prior to handing off execution to a bootloader of guest OS 126.”]. Regarding claim 2, Warkentin discloses launching at least one intermediate boot loader inside the UEFI emulation environment, the intermediate bootloader being loaded before booting a main operating system of the computer system [para. 0026: bootloader of guest OS 126]. Regarding claim 5, Warkentin discloses launching a final operating system loader for launching a main operating system of the computer system [para. 0026: bootloader of guest OS 126]. Claim 13 is recites the same functions as the method of claim 1, and is therefore rejected on the same basis. Regarding claim 14, Warkentin discloses an apparatus for a computer system, the apparatus comprising one or more interfaces and one or more processors, wherein the apparatus is configured to perform the method according to claim 1 [Fig. 1]. 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Warkentin in view of Venkat et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0033220. Regarding claim 8, Warkentin discloses the method of claim 1, and also teaches an OS kernel launched by the emulation environment boot loader, but does not teach device drivers for supporting one or more hardware devices are launched with the OS kernel. Venkat discloses device drivers for supporting one or more hardware devices are launched with an OS kernel [para. 0016: “The hypervisor typically provides a number of device drivers that support use of I/O by the VMs being managed by the hypervisor.”]. 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 Warkentin and Venkat by modifying Warkentin to launch device drivers with the OS kernel, as taught by Venkat. Warkentin and Venkat both disclose the use of hypervisor. Warkentin additionally teaches that the system includes I/O devices [Fig. 1: IO 114; para. 0016]] Venkat teaches that device drivers are typically provided by a hypervisor to support I/O use by VMs. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Venkat to Warkentin based on Venkat’s teachings that provision of device drivers by hypervisors is typical, and that such provision enables the use of the I/O devices in Warkentin’s system. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sakib et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0051347, discloses executable components for a VM including UEFI firmware, and OS boot loader, and an OS kernel [para. 0052]. Emelyanov et al., U.S. Patent No. 11,113,400, discloses a boot loader that is verified by an OS kernel prior to launching an emulation environment [col. 3, lines 20-24]. Kato et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0239896, discloses an emulation environment that is launched by a boot loader [para. 0038]. Miloser, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0328173, discloses a management layer that includes a micro-kernel instantiated by a boot loader [para. 0008]. Uemura et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0086583, discloses a UEFI of an emulation environment that reads a boot loader to obtain a boot image prior to handing over control to a guest OS [para. 0103]. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JI H BAE whose telephone number is (571)272-7181. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday to Friday and every other Monday, 9 am to 6 pm. 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, Jaweed Abbaszadeh can be reached at 571-270-1640. 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. /JI H BAE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2176 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Phone: 571-272-7181 Fax: 571-273-7181 ji.bae@uspto.gov 1 The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of a “emulation environment boot loader” may include hypervisor 118, which is disclosed by Warkentin as initializing a virtual platform.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 08, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602233
BOOT PROGRAM EMULATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596426
CONTROL OF POWER STATE IN COMPUTER PROCESSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591377
MEMORY MODULE CAPABLE OF REDUCING POWER CONSUMPTION AND SEMICONDUCTOR SYSTEM INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591378
MEMORY MODULE CAPABLE OF REDUCING POWER CONSUMPTION AND SEMICONDUCTOR SYSTEM INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12580721
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD FOR SAMPLING RECEIVED DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 768 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month