DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
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 .
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4. 8-10, 12-14, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over C.A. No. 2276640 A1 to Korn in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0279893 A1 to Branton.
As to claim 1, Korn teaches a method for sharing data between a cross-end container (Virtual Machine Execution Environmnet 21) and a native runtime environment (Native Execution Environment 22), wherein the cross-end container and the native runtime environment run on a target terminal (Computer System 10), and the method comprises:
acquiring or updating, by the cross-end container (Virtual Machine Execution Environmnet 21) or the native runtime environment (Native Execution Environment 22), target data, and saving the target data to a shared storage region in the native runtime environment respectively (Native Communication Mechanism 33/Shared Memory Mechanism) (“…transfer information…” pages 6/7 lines 1-27); and
accessing, by the native runtime environment (Native Execution Environment 22) or the cross-end container (Virtual Machine Execution Environmnet 21), the shared storage region (Native Communication Mechanism 33/Shared Memory Mechanism), and reading the target data corresponding to the native runtime environment or the cross-end container (“…retrieve…” pages 6/7 lines 1-27).
Korn is silent with reference to a first data format corresponding to the cross-end container and a second data format corresponding to the native runtime environment.
Branton teaches a first data format corresponding to the cross-end container (Javascript Object Notation (JSON), and a second data format corresponding to the native runtime environment (serialized data) (“…Database management module 516 can provide functions as described herein for communicating with database 518, such as importing data from data files stored in cloud 506 into database 518, exporting data from database 518 into cloud data files for storage in cloud 506, and other functions. In some embodiments, database management module 516 can be used to read and write data directly to and from data files stored in cloud 506. In such embodiments, database 518 is not needed to provide data storage. Reading and writing data to and from data files can be performed by serializing data that is stored in memory, or in database 518, and writing the serialized data into files. Data to be written can additionally be formatted according to a particular format or syntax, such as Javascript Object Notation (JSON), eXtensible Markup Language (XML), plain text, as a database dump format from a database such as MYSQL.TM. or ORACLE.TM., or any other convenient format…” paragraph 0049).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Korn with the teaching of Branton because the teaching of Branton would improve the system of Korn by providing a technique for saving and retrieving data in varying number of formats to satisfy the requester format preference.
As to claim 2, Korn teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein acquiring or updating, by the cross-end container or the native runtime environment, target data, and saving the target data to a shared storage region in the native runtime environment respectively in a first data format corresponding to the cross-end container and a second data format corresponding to the native runtime environment, comprises:
saving, by the cross-end container, the target data to the shared storage region, through a bridge module (Virtual Machine/Native Accessibility Bridge/Virtual Machine Bridge Class Object 30/Native Bridge Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs) 31/32) configured to transmit data between the native runtime environment and the cross-end container (“…transfer information…” pages 6/7 lines 1-27);
accessing, by the native runtime environment or the cross-end container, the shared storage region, and reading the target data to the native runtime environment or the cross-end container, comprises:
accessing, by the cross-end container, the shared storage region through the bridge module, and reading the target data in the first data format (“…retrieve…” pages 6/7 lines 1-27).
Branton teaches a first data format corresponding to the cross-end container (Javascript Object Notation (JSON), and a second data format corresponding to the native runtime environment (serialized data) (“…Database management module 516 can provide functions as described herein for communicating with database 518, such as importing data from data files stored in cloud 506 into database 518, exporting data from database 518 into cloud data files for storage in cloud 506, and other functions. In some embodiments, database management module 516 can be used to read and write data directly to and from data files stored in cloud 506. In such embodiments, database 518 is not needed to provide data storage. Reading and writing data to and from data files can be performed by serializing data that is stored in memory, or in database 518, and writing the serialized data into files. Data to be written can additionally be formatted according to a particular format or syntax, such as Javascript Object Notation (JSON), eXtensible Markup Language (XML), plain text, as a database dump format from a database such as MYSQL.TM. or ORACLE.TM., or any other convenient format…” paragraph 0049).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Korn with the teaching of Branton because the teaching of Branton would improve the system of Korn by providing a technique for saving and retrieving data in varying number of formats to satisfy the requester format preference.
As to claim 4, Korn teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein acquiring or updating, by the cross-end container (Virtual Machine Execution Environmnet 21) or the native runtime environment (Native Execution Environment 22), target data, comprises: updating, by the cross-end container or the native runtime environment, the target data inside the cross-end container or the native runtime environment (“…transfer information…” pages 6/7 lines 1-27).
As to claim 8, Branton teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the first data format is a Json format (Javascript Object Notation (JSON), and the second data format is a class instance serialization format (Serialized data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Korn with the teaching of Branton because the teaching of Branton would improve the system of Korn by providing a technique for saving and retrieving data in varying number of formats to satisfy the requester format preference.
As to claim 9 and 13, see the rejection of claim 1 above, expect for a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium and electronic device comprising at least one memory and at least one processor.
Korn teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Mass Storage Subsystems) and electronic device (Computer System 10) comprising at least one memory (Memory) and at least one processor (Processor Module 11).
As to claims 10 and 14, see the rejection of claim 2 above.
As to claims 12 and 16, see the rejection of claim 4 above.
Claims 3, 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over C.A. No. 2276640 A1 to Korn in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0279893 A1 to Branton as applied to claims 1, 9 and 13 above, and further in view of C.N. No. 106506703 A to Wang et al.
As to claim 3, Korn as modified by Branton teaches the method according to claim 1, however it is silent with reference to wherein acquiring or updating, target data, comprises: acquiring, the target data from an external data source.
Wang teaches wherein acquiring or updating, target data, comprises: acquiring, the target data from an external data source (service provider) (“…step S206, writing the service provider information of the service in the shared memory…step S103, the service the service provider information written into the shared memory for the client from the shared memory read service of the service provider information and returning to the application layer…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Korn and Branton with the teaching of Wang because the teaching of Wang would improve the system of Korn and Branton by providing a service provider for providing data for storage and sharing in a shared memory.
As to claim 11, see the rejection of claim 3 above.
Claims 5, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over C.A. No. 2276640 A1 to Korn in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0279893 A1 to Branton as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of U.S Pub. No. 2012/0023558 A1 to Rafiq.
As to claim 5, Korn as modified by Branton teaches the method according to claim 1, however it is silent with reference to the shared storage region comprises a global single object instance.
Rafiq teaches the shared storage region comprises a global single object instance (single global address space) (“…As shown in FIG. 1G, the computing device 100 may comprise multiple processors and may provide functionality for simultaneous execution of instructions or for simultaneous execution of one instruction on more than one piece of data. In some embodiments, the computing device 100 may comprise a parallel processor with one or more cores. In one of these embodiments, the computing device 100 is a shared memory parallel device, with multiple processors and/or multiple processor cores, accessing all available memory as a single global address space. In another of these embodiments, the computing device 100 is a distributed memory parallel device with multiple processors each accessing local memory only. In still another of these embodiments, the computing device 100 has both some memory which is shared and some memory which can only be accessed by particular processors or subsets of processors…” paragraph ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Korn and Branton with the teaching of Rafiq because the teaching of Rafiq would improve the system of Korn and Branton by providing a distributed memory parallel device that allows multiplicity of processors.
As to claim 17, see the rejection of claim 5 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7, 18 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The closest prior art of records, (C.A. No. 2276640 A1 to Korn and U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0279893 A1 to Branton), taken alone or in combination do not specifically disclose or suggest the claimed recitations (claims 6, 7, 18, and 19) when taken in the context of claims as a whole.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0047517 A1 to Ding et al. and directed to a hybrid-model network application includes a native component that provides user-level access to features of a networked computing device and a web client component that provides access to web services of a server.
U.S. Pat. No. 9047404 B1 issued to Jibaly et al. and directed to a method or deployment on target devices within native code containers that provide access to native resources on the target devices.
U.S. Pub. No. 20130263160 A1 to Sandholm et al. and directed to a method for cross-platform web-based native device feature access may include receiving a call from a web application to access a native device feature, with the call being redirected to a platform agnostic custom URL. The method may further include translating the custom URL into a native object call, and accessing the native device feature based on the native object call.
C.N. No. 108804082 A to Shao et al. and directed to directed to realizing method of Plug-in JSBridge.
K.R. No. 20050031954 A to Liu et al. and directed to a method and a system for transmitting data objects are provided to use multiple data type representations in order to transmit the data objects to elements of a distributed system.
Bai et al. "BridgeTaint: A Bi-Directional Dynamic Taint Tracking Method for JavaScript Bridges in Android Hybrid Applications" 07-2018 IEEE pages 677-692.
Lee et al. "HybriDroid: Static Analysis Framework for Android Hybrid Applications" 08-2016 IEEE pages 1-12.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES E ANYA whose telephone number is (571)272-3757. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fir. 9-6pm.
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, KEVIN YOUNG can be reached at 571-270-3180. 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.
/CHARLES E ANYA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2194
Prosecution Insights