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 .
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 10-14 and 77-81 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kramer et al. (US 7,636,872), hereinafter referred to as Kramer in view of Oyoshi (US 2016/0246524), hereinafter referred to as Oyoshi.
Referring to claim 10, Kramer teaches, as claimed, a method for backing up data, comprising: receiving, by a host controller of a data storage device in a computing system, an indication of a threatening event (i.e.-detecting an imminent threat to data integrity, col. 1, lines line 53; col. 4, lines 8-12 & 19-20 and see fig. 2, block 210) in the computing system; and backing up, by the host controller, one or more data files in the data storage device (i.e.-backup copy of stored data, col. 1, lines 54-55; col. 4, lines 50-56; and col. 5, lines 1-8 & 34-38).
However, Kramer does not teach the steps of: delaying, by the host controller, the threatening event; and allowing, by the host controller, the threatening event after completion of the backing up of the one or more data files.
On the other hand, Oyoshi disclsoes delaying of a threatening event (i.e.-temporarily terminating operation of data processing, such as data erasure/deletion, page 3, ¶37, lines 10-12); and allowing the threatening event after completion of the backing up of the one or more data files (i.e.-allowing erasure of the data after data backup completion, page 3, ¶38, lines 15-17; 28-34 and 37-40).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Kramer and incorporate the steps of delaying, by the host controller, the threatening event; and allowing, by the host controller, the threatening event after completion of the backing up of the one or more data files, as taught by Oyoshi. The motivation for doing so would have been to identify and backup non-corrupted and/or clean data and, continue erasing any compromised data due to the threatening event.
As to claim 11, the modified Kramer teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the threatening event poses a threat to the one or more data files (col. 4, lines 8-11).
As to claim 12, the modified Kramer teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the one or more data files are pre-selected for back up by a user of the computing system (col. 4, lines 48-53).
As to claim 13, the modified Kramer teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the one or more data files are backed up by storage of the one or more data files in a predetermined location of the data storage device (col. 5, lines 1-8).
As to claim 14, the modified Kramer teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the threatening event is deletion or modification of the one or more data files (col. 4, lines 9-11 and 15-20).
Referring to claims 77-81, the claims are substantially the same as claims 10-14, hence the rejection of claims 10-14 is applied accordingly.
Examiner’s note:
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passages as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hiraoka et al. (US 2003/0220950), Jakob (US 7,921,268), Armorer et al. (US 7,693,889), McGoldrick et al. (US 6,226,708), Boutnaru (US 2018/0075234) and Chopra et al. (US 9,842,027) do teach method and system configured for backing up of data in response to detection of an imminent threat.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIAS MAMO whose telephone number is (571)270-1726. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu, 7 AM - 5 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, HENRY TSAI can be reached at 571-272-4176.
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.
/Elias Mamo/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2184