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 .
The instant application having application No. 18/899,937 filed on 9/27/2024, presents claims 21-40 for examination, claims priority to 18/501643, filed 11/3/2023, to 17/203633, filed 3/16/2021, and to Pro 62/990199, filed 3/16/2020.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 2/24/2025 and on 6/16/2025 were filed before the mailing date of the Non-Final Office Action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9, 12-15, and 17 of US patent No. 11842187. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other (see explanation below).
Instant Application 18/899937
US patent No. 11842187
Obvious comparison
Claim 21.A method comprising: obtaining a platform-agnostic application configuration comprising a data model of a plurality of data objects and a plurality of application components configured to be interpreted by a plurality of system-specific application platforms to dynamically render a plurality of platform- specific applications at runtime, wherein the data model includes relationship data indicative of characteristics of relationships between respective data objects of the plurality of data objects, and further includes actions indicative of interaction rules associated with the respective data objects and external communications;
rendering, by the computing device, an application generated at runtime and comprising a platform-specific implementation of the platform-agnostic application configuration;
receiving one or more configuration updates, wherein the one or more configuration updates do not depend on an operating environment of the computing device; and
rendering, by the computing device, an updated application without the computing device installing additional software code for the updated application, wherein rendering the updated application comprises modifying the application generated at runtime according to the one or more configuration updates.
Claim 22.The method of claim 21, wherein the application generated at runtime is generated by the computing device using a system-specific application platform.
Claim 23.wherein the one or more configuration updates are associated with the platform-agnostic application configuration, and wherein the one or more configuration updates are agnostic to the operating environment of the computing device.
Claim 24.
The method of claim 21, wherein the updated application is generated without the computing device installing new or updated software code for the updated application.
Claim 25.The method of claim 21, wherein each platform-specific application of the plurality of platform-specific applications is associated with at least one of a different layout, a different functionality, or a different content.
Claim 26.
The method of claim 21, wherein each platform-specific application of the plurality of platform-specific applications is rendered using the same platform-agnostic application configuration.
Claim 27.
The method of claim 21, wherein: the plurality of application components comprises at least one of data objects, application layouts, rules, or actions; and the plurality of system-specific application platforms comprises application platforms supported by at least one of different hardware environments or different software environments.
Claim 28.
The method of claim 21, wherein the platform-specific implementation generated at runtime comprises a domain-specific application having at least one of application requirements, rules, modules, or data objects associated with a configured domain.
Claim 29.
The method of claim 21, wherein the plurality of platform-specific applications at runtime includes at least one of different domain-specific applications or variations of one or more domain-specific applications.
Claim 30.
The method of claim 21, further comprising: modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration to generate the one or more configuration updates; and based on the one or more configuration updates, dynamically rendering an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime.
Claim 31.
The method of claim 30, wherein modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration comprises modifying a platform-agnostic configuration language definition of one or more application components of the plurality of application components, the one or more application components comprising at least one of an application object, an object definition, an object action, or an application layout describing a user interface associated with the application.
Claim 32.
The method of claim 21, wherein generating the updated application comprises generating an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime, based on interpreting the one or more configuration updates at runtime using the system-specific application platform at the computing device.
Claim 33.
The method of claim 32, wherein generating an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime comprises: applying, by the computing device, the one or more configuration updates to the platform- specific version of the application at runtime without installing new or updated software code; and dynamically rendering the updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime.
Claim 34.
Claim 35.
Claim 36.
Claim 37.
Claim 38.
Claim 39.
Claim 40.
Claim 1.A method comprising: obtaining a platform-agnostic application configuration corresponding to a given application, the platform-agnostic application configuration comprising a data model of a plurality of data objects and a plurality of application components defined using a platform-agnostic configuration language, wherein: the data model further includes relationship data indicative of characteristics of relationships between respective data objects of the plurality of data objects and further includes actions indicative of interaction rules associated with the respective data objects and external communications;
the platform-agnostic configuration language is configured to be interpreted by a plurality of system-specific application platforms to dynamically render different platform-specific versions of the given application at runtime, wherein each platform-specific version of the given application is dynamically rendered based on the same platform-agnostic configuration language; and
the different platform-specific versions of the given application include platform-specific attributes generated by interpreting the same platform-agnostic configuration language used to define the plurality of application components, such that the different platform-specific versions of the given application comprise at least one of different layouts, different functionalities, and different content;
based on the platform-agnostic application configuration for the given application, generating, by a computing device using a system-specific application platform, a platform-specific version of the given application at runtime, the platform-specific version of the given application comprising a platform-specific interpretation of the platform-agnostic application configuration for the given application;
rendering, by the computing device, the platform-specific version of the given application at runtime; and
based on one or more configuration updates that are associated with the platform-agnostic application configuration for the given application and that are agnostic to an operating environment of the computing device, generating, by the computing device, an updated platform-specific version of the given application without the computing device installing new or updated software code for the updated platform-specific version of the given application, the updated platform-specific version of the given application comprising the platform-specific version of the given application modified to reflect the one or more configuration updates.
Claim 1. …the platform-agnostic configuration language is configured to be interpreted by a plurality of system-specific application platforms to dynamically render different platform-specific versions of the given application at runtime, wherein each platform-specific version of the given application is dynamically rendered based on the same platform-agnostic configuration language; …
Claim 1. …based on one or more configuration updates that are associated with the platform-agnostic application configuration for the given application and that are agnostic to an operating environment of the computing device, …
Claim 1. …generating, by the computing device, an updated platform-specific version of the given application without the computing device installing new or updated software code for the updated platform-specific version of the given application, …
Claim 1. …the different platform-specific versions of the given application include platform-specific attributes generated by interpreting the same platform-agnostic configuration language used to define the plurality of application components, such that the different platform-specific versions of the given application comprise at least one of different layouts, different functionalities, and different content; …
Claim 1. …wherein each platform-specific version of the given application is dynamically rendered based on the same platform-agnostic configuration language; …
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of application components comprises at least one of data objects, application layouts, rules, and actions.
Claim 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of system-specific application platforms comprises application platforms supported by at least one of different hardware environments and different software environments.
Claim 4.
The method of claim 1, wherein the platform-specific version of the given application comprises a domain-specific application having at least one of application requirements, rules, modules, and data objects associated with a specific domain.
Claim 5.
The method of claim 1, wherein the different platform-specific versions of the given application comprise at least one of different domain-specific applications and variations of one or more domain-specific applications.
Claim 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration to yield the one or more configuration updates; and based on the one or more configuration updates, dynamically rendering the updated platform-specific version of the given application.
Claim 1, … rendering, by the computing device, the platform-specific version of the given application at runtime; …
Claim 7.
The method of claim 6, wherein modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration comprises modifying a platform-agnostic configuration language definition of one or more application components of the plurality of application components, the one or more application components comprising at least one of an application object, an object definition, an object action, and an application layout describing a user interface associated with the application.
Claim 8.
The method of claim 1, wherein generating the updated platform-specific version of the given application comprises: interpreting the one or more configuration updates at runtime using the system-specific application platform at the computing device.
Claim 9.
The method of claim 1 wherein generating the updated platform-specific version of the given application comprises: applying, by the computing device, the one or more configuration updates to the platform-specific version of the given application at runtime without installing new or updated software code; and dynamically rendering the updated platform-specific version of the given application at runtime.
Claim 12.
Claim 12.
Claim 12.
Claim 13.
Claim 14.
Claim 15.
Claim 17 and part of 12.
claims 21-26 of the instant Application are anticipated by claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 27 of the instant application is anticipated by claims 2-3 of the patent.
Claim 28 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 4 of the patent.
Claim 29 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 5 of the patent.
Claim 30 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 6 and part of claim1 of the patent.
Claim 31 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 7 of the patent.
Claim 32 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 8 of the patent.
Claim 33 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 9 of the patent.
Claims 34-40 of the instant case are anticipated by claims 12-15 and 17 of the patent.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11, and 14-20 of US patent No. 12135966. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other (see explanation below).
Instant Application 18/899937
US patent No. 12135966
Obvious comparison
Claim 21.A method comprising: obtaining a platform-agnostic application configuration comprising a data model of a plurality of data objects and a plurality of application components configured to be interpreted by a plurality of system-specific application platforms to dynamically render a plurality of platform- specific applications at runtime, wherein the data model includes relationship data indicative of characteristics of relationships between respective data objects of the plurality of data objects, and further includes actions indicative of interaction rules associated with the respective data objects and external communications;
rendering, by the computing device, an application generated at runtime and comprising a platform-specific implementation of the platform-agnostic application configuration;
receiving one or more configuration updates, wherein the one or more configuration updates do not depend on an operating environment of the computing device; and
rendering, by the computing device, an updated application without the computing device installing additional software code for the updated application, wherein rendering the updated application comprises modifying the application generated at runtime according to the one or more configuration updates.
Claim 22.The method of claim 21, wherein the application generated at runtime is generated by the computing device using a system-specific application platform.
Claim 23.wherein the one or more configuration updates are associated with the platform-agnostic application configuration, and wherein the one or more configuration updates are agnostic to the operating environment of the computing device.
Claim 24.
The method of claim 21, wherein the updated application is generated without the computing device installing new or updated software code for the updated application.
Claim 25.The method of claim 21, wherein each platform-specific application of the plurality of platform-specific applications is associated with at least one of a different layout, a different functionality, or a different content.
Claim 26.
The method of claim 21, wherein each platform-specific application of the plurality of platform-specific applications is rendered using the same platform-agnostic application configuration.
Claim 27.
The method of claim 21, wherein: the plurality of application components comprises at least one of data objects, application layouts, rules, or actions; and the plurality of system-specific application platforms comprises application platforms supported by at least one of different hardware environments or different software environments.
Claim 28.
The method of claim 21, wherein the platform-specific implementation generated at runtime comprises a domain-specific application having at least one of application requirements, rules, modules, or data objects associated with a configured domain.
Claim 29.
The method of claim 21, wherein the plurality of platform-specific applications at runtime includes at least one of different domain-specific applications or variations of one or more domain-specific applications.
Claim 30.
The method of claim 21, further comprising: modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration to generate the one or more configuration updates; and based on the one or more configuration updates, dynamically rendering an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime.
Claim 31.
The method of claim 30, wherein modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration comprises modifying a platform-agnostic configuration language definition of one or more application components of the plurality of application components, the one or more application components comprising at least one of an application object, an object definition, an object action, or an application layout describing a user interface associated with the application.
Claim 32.
The method of claim 21, wherein generating the updated application comprises generating an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime, based on interpreting the one or more configuration updates at runtime using the system-specific application platform at the computing device.
Claim 33.
The method of claim 32, wherein generating an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime comprises: applying, by the computing device, the one or more configuration updates to the platform- specific version of the application at runtime without installing new or updated software code; and dynamically rendering the updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime.
Claim 34.
Claim 35.
Claim 36.
Claim 37.
Claim 38.
Claim 39.
Claim 40.
Claim 1.A method comprising: obtaining a platform-agnostic application configuration comprising a data model of a plurality of data objects and a plurality of application components configured to be interpreted by a plurality of system-specific application platforms to dynamically render a plurality of platform-specific applications at runtime, wherein the data model includes relationship data indicative of characteristics of relationships between respective data objects of the plurality of data objects, and further includes actions indicative of interaction rules associated with the respective data objects and external communications;
generating, based on the platform-agnostic application configuration, an application at runtime comprising a platform-specific interpretation of the platform-agnostic application configuration, wherein the application at runtime is generated by a computing device using a system-specific application platform;
rendering, by the computing device, the application at runtime;
receiving one or more configuration updates associated with the platform-agnostic application configuration, wherein the one or more configuration updates are agnostic to an operating environment of the computing device; and
generating, by the computing device, an updated application without the computing device installing new or updated software code for the updated application, wherein the updated application comprises the application at runtime modified to reflect the one or more configuration updates.
Claim 1. …wherein the application at runtime is generated by a computing device using a system-specific application platform; …
Claim 1. …receiving one or more configuration updates associated with the platform-agnostic application configuration, wherein the one or more configuration updates are agnostic to an operating environment of the computing device, …
Claim 1. …generating, by the computing device, an updated application without the computing device installing new or updated software code for the updated application, wherein the updated application comprises the application at runtime modified to reflect the one or more configuration updates, …
Claim 2.The method of claim 1, wherein each platform-specific application of the plurality of platform-specific applications is associated with at least one of a different layout, a different functionality, or a different content.
Claim 3.The method of claim 1, wherein the same platform-agnostic application configuration is used to dynamically render each platform-specific application of the plurality of platform-specific applications.
Claim 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of application components comprises at least one of data objects, application layouts, rules, or actions.
Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of system-specific application platforms comprises application platforms supported by at least one of different hardware environments or different software environments.
Claim 6.
The method of claim 1, wherein the platform-specific interpretation generated at runtime comprises a domain-specific application having at least one of application requirements, rules, modules, or data objects associated with a configured domain.
Claim 7.
The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of platform-specific applications at runtime includes at least one of different domain-specific applications or variations of one or more domain-specific applications.
Claim 8.
The method of claim 1, further comprising: modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration to generate the one or more configuration updates; and based on the one or more configuration updates, dynamically rendering an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime.
Claim 9.
The method of claim 8, wherein modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration comprises modifying a platform-agnostic configuration language definition of one or more application components of the plurality of application components, the one or more application components comprising at least one of an application object, an object definition, an object action, or an application layout describing a user interface associated with the application.
Claim 10.
The method of claim 1, wherein generating the updated application comprises generating an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime, based on interpreting the one or more configuration updates at runtime using the system-specific application platform at the computing device.
Claim 11.
The method of claim 10, wherein generating an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime comprises: applying, by the computing device, the one or more configuration updates to the platform-specific version of the application at runtime without installing new or updated software code; and dynamically rendering the updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime.
Claim 14.
Claim 15.
Claim 16.
Claim 17.
Claim 18.
Claim 19.
Claim 20.
claims 21-24 of the instant Application are anticipated by claim 1 of the patent.
claims 25-33 of the instant Application are anticipated by claims 2-11 of the patent respectively.
Claims 34-40 of the instant case are anticipated by claims 14-20 of the patent.
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 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 21-27, 30-38, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeCoteau (US 20130054812 A1, hereinafter, “DeCoteau”, cited from IDS filed on 2/24/2025) in view of Almeida et al. (Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Workshop on Future Trends of Distributed Computing Systems (FTDCS’04) , “Platform-independent dynamic reconfiguration of distributed applications”, hereinafter, “Almeida”, cited from IDS filed on 2/24/2025), and SHOAVI et al (US 20160246594 A1, hereinafter, “SHOAVI”, cited from IDS filed on 2/24/2025).
With respect to claim 21 (New), DeCoteau discloses A method comprising:
obtaining a platform-agnostic application configuration comprising a data model of a plurality of data objects and a plurality of application components configured to be interpreted by a plurality of system-specific application platforms to dynamically render a plurality of platform- specific applications at runtime (e.g. para [0097], “FIG. 4 illustrates a process 400 for dynamically assembling an application for execution on a first device from a platform-independent application configuration. ….” para [0098], “In an operation 402, the receiving device 100 receives an application configuration…” para [0046], “… In some implementations, an application configuration may include at least metadata associating the configuration with the application…” wherein metadata reads on a data model and one of ordinary skill in the art understands that metadata describes other data which read on data objects. para [0113] discloses the platform-independent application configuration comprises a plurality of application components), [wherein the data model includes relationship data indicative of characteristics of relationships between respective data objects of the plurality of data objects, and further includes actions indicative of interaction rules associated with the respective data objects and external communications];
rendering, by the computing device, an application generated at runtime and comprising a platform-specific implementation of the platform-agnostic application configuration (e.g. para [0102], “In an operation 408, the receiving device 100 may execute the assembled at the device 100. For example, the RARE engine 110 may provide information including, for example, application resources, parsed markup language, display objects, scripts, program code, and/or other information for execution by the receiving device 100. …”);
DeCoteau does not appear to explicitly disclose
…, wherein the data model includes relationship data indicative of characteristics of relationships between respective data objects of the plurality of data objects, and further includes actions indicative of interaction rules associated with the respective data objects and external communications;
receiving one or more configuration updates, wherein the one or more configuration updates do not depend on an operating environment of the computing device; and
rendering, by the computing device, an updated application without the computing device installing additional software code for the updated application, wherein rendering the updated application comprises modifying the application generated at runtime according to the one or more configuration updates.
However, in analogous art, Almeida discloses
…, wherein the data model includes relationship data indicative of characteristics of relationships between respective data objects of the plurality of data objects (e.g. section 3, second paragraph, “… Composite steps are often required for reconfiguration of sets of related components. In a set of related components, a change to a component A may require changes to other components that depend on A’s characteristics. …” section 3, third paragraph, “We represent these specializations of the component concept in UML 2.0 [14] by introducing the stereotype «reconfigurablecomponent», which can be applied to a UML component. This stereotype has tagged values isReplaceable and isMigrateable. UML statecharts can be used to specify the behaviour of (reconfigurable) components.” Wherein a component reads on a data object), and further includes actions indicative of interaction rules associated with the respective data objects and external communications (e.g. section 2, third paragraph, “Characteristics of an abstract platform may be implied by the set of design concepts used for describing the platform-independent model of a distributed application. …. For example, in UML 2.0 [14], the reliability characteristics of “signals” exchanged between “objects” is a semantic variation point. A UML Profile may specialize UML 2.0 and state that “signals” are exchanged reliably, thereby defining an abstract platform that supports reliable asynchronous message exchange.” Wherein reliable reads on the interaction rule, and the message exchange reads on external communications);
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 invention of DeCoteau with the invention of Almeida because its teaching provides benefit of deriving different alternative platform specific models from the same platform independent model and partially automating the model transformation process and the realization of the distributed application on specific target platforms. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of providing techniques for deriving different alternative platform specific models from the same platform independent model and partially automating the model transformation process and the realization of the distributed application on specific target platforms as suggested by Almeida (see Introduction, paragraph 5).
DeCoteau as modified by Almeida does not appear to explicitly disclose
receiving one or more configuration updates, wherein the one or more configuration updates do not depend on an operating environment of the computing device; and
rendering, by the computing device, an updated application without the computing device installing additional software code for the updated application, wherein rendering the updated application comprises modifying the application generated at runtime according to the one or more configuration updates.
However, in analogous art SHOAVI teaches
receiving one or more configuration updates, wherein the one or more configuration updates do not depend on an operating environment of the computing device (para [0065], “On Step 234, after the app is invoked, the app may transmit a request to a server to receive updated modifiable configurations…” wherein the modifiable configurations are about enabling or disabling the wrapped functions and are irrelevant to operating environment),
rendering, by the computing device, an updated application without the computing device installing additional software code for the updated application, wherein rendering the updated application comprises modifying the application generated at runtime according to the one or more configuration updates (para [0066], “…if invocation of a function of the one or more wrapped functions is enabled by the modifiable configurations, the function may be invoked by the respective wrapper and return the same value as the original function returns….” wherein a function is enabled or disabled based on the modifiable configurations reads on generating an updated application without installing additional software code).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the invention of SHOAVI because it may provide techniques for selectively enabling or disabling invocation of the one or more functions during runtime of the application program by modifying the modifiable configurations without re-deploying the application program on the one or more mobile computing devices as suggested by SHOAVI (see [0025]).
With respect to claim 22 (New), DeCoteau discloses wherein the application generated at runtime is generated by the computing device using a system-specific application platform (e.g. para [0097], “FIG. 4 illustrates a process 400 for dynamically assembling an application for execution on a first device from a platform-independent application configuration. ….”).
With respect to claim 23 (New), SHOAVI discloses wherein the one or more configuration updates are associated with the platform-agnostic application configuration, and wherein the one or more configuration updates are agnostic to the operating environment of the computing device (para [0065], “On Step 234, after the app is invoked, the app may transmit a request to a server to receive updated modifiable configurations…” wherein the modifiable configurations are about enabling or disabling the wrapped functions and are irrelevant to operating environment, see para [0062]. For motivation to combine, please refer to office action regarding claim 21).
With respect to claim 24 (New), SHOAVI discloses wherein the updated application is generated without the computing device installing new or updated software code for the updated application (para [0066], “…if invocation of a function of the one or more wrapped functions is enabled by the modifiable configurations, the function may be invoked by the respective wrapper and return the same value as the original function returns….” wherein a function is enabled or disabled based on the modifiable configurations reads on generating an updated application without installing new or updated software code. For motivation to combine, please refer to office action regarding claim 21).
With respect to claim 25 (New), DeCoteau discloses wherein each platform-specific application of the plurality of platform-specific applications is associated with at least one of a different layout, a different functionality, or a different content (e.g. para [0061], “A system variable may be an embeddable variable reference that is not specific to the particular instance of the application configuration or application being assembled. …” also refer to para [0067]).
With respect to claim 26 (New), DeCoteau discloses wherein each platform-specific application of the plurality of platform-specific applications is rendered using the same platform-agnostic application configuration (e.g. para [0061], “A system variable may be an embeddable variable reference that is not specific to the particular instance of the application configuration or application being assembled. …”).
With respect to claim 27 (New), DeCoteau discloses wherein:
the plurality of application components comprises at least one of data objects, application layouts, rules, or actions (e.g. para [0067], “… In some implementations, a widget may also be represented by a RenderableDataItem object”); and
the plurality of system-specific application platforms comprises application platforms supported by at least one of different hardware environments or different software environments. (e.g. para [0061], “A system variable may be an embeddable variable reference that is not specific to the particular instance of the application configuration or application being assembled. …” wherein the system may be hardware or software or both hardware and software).
With respect to claim 30 (New), DeCoteau discloses further comprising:
modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration to generate the one or more configuration updates (e.g. para [0020], “… In some examples, the application configuration may specify replacements for one or more of the built-in features. In some examples, an application configuration may specify an alternate feature to be used instead of the default feature for the application. For example, the application configuration may include a URL identifying a location at which a resource including the alternative feature may be available…”); and
SHOAVI further teaches
based on the one or more configuration updates, dynamically rendering an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime (para [0066], “On Step 240, during runtime of the application program, if invocation of a function of the one or more wrapped functions is enabled by the modifiable configurations, the function may be invoked by the respective wrapper and return the same value as the original function returns….” wherein a function is enabled or disabled based on the modifiable configurations reads on rendering an updated application. For motivation to combine, please refer to office action regarding claim 1).
With respect to claim 31 (New), SHOAVI further teaches wherein modifying at least a portion of the platform-agnostic application configuration comprises modifying a platform-agnostic configuration language definition of one or more application components of the plurality of application components, the one or more application components comprising at least one of an application object, an object definition, an object action, or an application layout describing a user interface associated with the application (para [0034], “…wherein each wrapper is configured to selectively enable and disable invocation of the wrapped function during runtime of the application program based on modifiable configurations, without requiring re-deployment of the application program.” For motivation to combine, please refer to office action regarding claim 1).
With respect to claim 32 (New), SHOAVI further teaches wherein generating the updated application comprises generating an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime, based on interpreting the one or more configuration updates at runtime using the system-specific application platform at the computing device (para [0066], “On Step 240, during runtime of the application program, if invocation of a function of the one or more wrapped functions is enabled by the modifiable configurations, the function may be invoked by the respective wrapper and return the same value as the original function returns….” wherein a function is enabled or disabled based on the modifiable configurations reads on interpreting the updates. For motivation to combine, please refer to office action regarding claim 1).
With respect to claim 33 (New), SHOAVI further teaches wherein generating an updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime comprises: applying, by the computing device, the one or more configuration updates to the platform- specific version of the application at runtime without installing new or updated software code (para [0034], “…wherein each wrapper is configured to selectively enable and disable invocation of the wrapped function during runtime of the application program based on modifiable configurations, without requiring re-deployment of the application program.” wherein the modifiable configurations indicate configuration updates). and
dynamically rendering the updated platform-specific version of the application at runtime (para [0066], “On Step 240, during runtime of the application program, if invocation of a function of the one or more wrapped functions is enabled by the modifiable configurations, the function may be invoked by the respective wrapper and return the same value as the original function returns….” wherein a function is enabled or disabled based on the modifiable configurations reads on rendering an updated application).
With respect to claim 34 (New), it is directed to a system to implement the method disclosed in claim 21, please see the rejections directed to claim 21 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 34. Note that, DeCoteau teaches A system comprising:
one or more processors; and
a computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions that, when 30executed by the one or more processors (e.g. Abstract, Fig. 1):
With respect to claim 35 (New), it recites same features as claim 25, and is rejected for the same reason.
With respect to claim 36 (New), it recites same features as claim 26, and is rejected for the same reason.
With respect to claim 37 (New), it recites same features as the first limitation of claim 27, and is rejected for the same reason as for claim 27.
With respect to claim 38 (New), it recites same features as the second limitation of claim 27, and is rejected for the same reason as for claim 27.
With respect to claim 40 (New), it recites same features as claim 30, and is rejected for the same reason.
Claims 28-29 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeCoteau in view of Almeida and SHOAVI as applied to claim 21, and 34 respectively, in further view of ARIANS et al (US 20170185395 A1, hereinafter, “ARIANS”, cited from IDS filed on 2/2/2025).
With respect to claim 28 (New), DeCoteau as modified by Almeida and SHOAVI discloses The method of claim 21, but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the platform-specific implementation generated at runtime comprises a domain-specific application having at least one of application requirements, rules, modules, or data objects associated with a configured domain, however, this is taught by analogous art ARIANS (e.g. para [0021], “The application 102 includes a web application, which may include user interface applications, content access application, collaborative applications, enterprise applications...” where enterprise applications read on modules associated with a specific domain and hence domain-specific).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the invention of ARIANS so that the technique may be applied to various types of applications as suggested by ARIANS (see [0021]).
With respect to claim 29 (New), DeCoteau as modified by Almeida and SHOAVI discloses The method of claim 21, but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of platform-specific applications at runtime includes at least one of different domain-specific applications or variations of one or more domain-specific applications, however, this is taught by analogous art ARIANS (e.g. para [0021] as cited for claim 4 teaches domain-specific applications, para [0020], “…The application 102 includes an application identifier 106 and an application version 108. …” wherein application version indicates variations of domain-specific applications. For motivation to combine, please refer to office action regarding claim 4).
With respect to claim 39 (New), it recites same features as claim 28, and is rejected for the same reason.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. For example, NANDAKUMAR et al., US 20170102976 A1 teaches mobile application configuration agnostic to operating system versions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Zengpu Wei whose telephone number is 571-270-1302. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:00AM to 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bradley Teets, can be reached on 571-272-3338. 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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
/ZENGPU WEI/
Examiner, Art Unit 2197
Prosecution Insights