DETAILED ACTION
This Final Office Action is in response to amendment filed on 08/04/2026. Claims 1, 3-5, 8-9, and 11-12 have been amended. Claims 13-14 have been newly added. Claims 1-14 remain pending in the 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 .
Drawings
The drawings filed on 11/05/2024 are accepted.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s claims amendments have overcome the objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 05/05/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant stated in Page 9 “Han merely teaches that the size of the backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space so that different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces are met. See page 3, lines 46-49…Neither Han nor Hoffer contains description regarding "a first storage section that stores a plurality of firmware types to be started in stages, a second storage section that stores at least one of the plurality of firmware types as a backup" and "the hardware processor selects, according to an apparatus state, at least one of the plurality of firmware types to be stored as backup in the second storage section." The additionally cited art cannot cure the aforementioned deficiencies of Aggarwal in regards to claim 1.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Aggarwal illustrates in [0026] and Figure 3 250 storing primary firmware types 310 and 320, and 320 storing the different copies of the firmware types, and Han discloses storing, at least one as drafted in claim 1, a new version of a firmware as backup based on the storage space available. Therefore, Aggarwal in view of Han discloses the above argued limitations.
Regarding newly added claim 13, applicant is directed to the below detailed rejection.
Regarding newly added claim 14, examiner objected to claim 14 as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. Please see detailed allowable subject matter below.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-4, 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aggarwal (US 20200226260 A1) in view of Han (CN 111124464 A).
Regarding claim 1, Aggarwal teaches an image processing apparatus (Aggarwal Abstract “An apparatus to facilitate firmware resiliency in a computer system platform is disclosed.”), comprising:
a first storage section that stores a plurality of firmware types to be started in stages (Aggarwal Figure 3 250 storing primary firmware 310, where 310 comprises multiple pieces starting in stages as illustrated in Figure 4A, security firmware 410, then BIOS firmware 420, [0033] “At processing block 410, security firmware is loaded from primary firmware 310 and executed.”, [0034] “Upon a determination at decision block 415 that the security firmware has not been corrupted, BIOS firmware is loaded from primary firmware 310 and executed, processing block 420.”, where the security firmware and BIOS firmware corresponds to the a plurality of firmware types );
a second storage section that stores at least one of the plurality of firmware types as a backup (Aggarwal Figure 3 320 storing firmware copy 320 comprising copies of security firmware 410, and BIOS firmware 420, where one firmware is loaded from the secondary storage 320 to the firsts storage 250 upon a determination that the firmware is corrupted as illustrated in Figure 4AC 460 and Figure 4B 440, as disclosed in [0037-0038], and [0026] “…the backup firmware is used to restore the firmware stored in non-volatile memory 250 upon detecting unauthorized access to primary firmware 310 (e.g., firmware attacked or corrupted). In yet a further embodiment, requirements are implemented at secondary firmware storage 320 to prevent the attacks or failures that may occur at primary firmware 310.”); and
a hardware processor (Aggarwal Figure 3 security resiliency agent 330 in Figure 3 [0031] “…resiliency agent 330 performs an inspection of primary firmware 310 during a boot up process of platform 200 to determine whether primary firmware 310 has been detected. In such an embodiment, resiliency agent 330 initiates a recovery boot from secondary firmware storage 320 upon detecting that primary firmware 310 has been corrupted. FIGS. 4A-4D is a flow diagram illustrating one embodiment of a process performed by resiliency agent 330.”) that:
detects tampering of each of he plurality of firmware types stored in the first storage section (Aggarwal Figure 4A (415 and 425), where attack/unauthorized access is construed as a corrupted firmware as disclosed in [0026], where corrupted correspond to tampered “…the backup firmware is used to restore the firmware stored in non-volatile memory 250 upon detecting unauthorized access to primary firmware 310 (e.g., firmware attacked or corrupted). In yet a further embodiment, requirements are implemented at secondary firmware storage 320 to prevent the attacks or failures that may occur at primary firmware 310.”), and restores the tampered firmware by using the firmware stored in the second storage section when the tampering of the firmware stored in the first storage section is detected (Aggarwal Figure 4C 460 to restore security firmware 410 when corrupted, and Figure 4B 440 to restore BIOS firmware 420 when corrupted, [0026] “…the backup firmware is used to restore the firmware stored in non-volatile memory 250 upon detecting unauthorized access to primary firmware 310 (e.g., firmware attacked or corrupted). In yet a further embodiment, requirements are implemented at secondary firmware storage 320 to prevent the attacks or failures that may occur at primary firmware 310.”),
Aggarwal does not disclose the below limitation.
Han discloses wherein the hardware processor selects, according to an apparatus state, at least one of the plurality of firmware types to be stored as backup in the second storage section (Han Page 3 line 46-49 “…determining the size of the backup data upgraded at each step and the size of the target data of the new version firmware according to the size of the backup space. Therefore, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of the backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of the differential data used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of storage spaces of various embedded systems are met.”, Page 5 line 6-9 “Therefore, in order to meet the software upgrading requirements of the embedded system with limited storage space, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of differential data used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces are met.”, where a size of a backup data pertaining to the firmware is determined/selected such that it accommodates the available backup space, where the determination/selection process is decomposed into a sub-upgrading processes to accommodate different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal to incorporate the teaching of Han to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of storing new version firmware while accommodating the backup space, as recognized by (Han Page 3 line 46-49).
Regarding claim 3, Aggarwal in view of Han taches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Aggarwal does not disclose the below limitation.
Han discloses wherein the hardware processor selects the firmware to be stored as a backup in the second storage section from among the plurality of firmware types based on a storage capacity of the second storage section (Han Page 3 line 46-49 “…determining the size of the backup data upgraded at each step and the size of the target data of the new version firmware according to the size of the backup space. Therefore, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of the backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of the differential data used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of storage spaces of various embedded systems are met.”, Page 5 line 6-9 “Therefore, in order to meet the software upgrading requirements of the embedded system with limited storage space, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of differential data used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces are met.”, where a size of a backup data pertaining to the firmware is determined/selected such that it accommodates the available backup space, where the determination/selection process is decomposed into a sub-upgrading processes to accommodate different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal to incorporate the teaching of Han to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of storing new version firmware while accommodating the backup space, as recognized by (Han Page 3 line 46-49).
Regarding claim 4, Aggarwal in view of Han taches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Aggarwal does not disclose the below limitation.
Han discloses wherein the hardware processor selects the firmware to be stored as backup in the second storage section from among the plurality of firmware types based on a change in data amount of the plurality of firmware types (Han Page 3 line 46-49 “…determining the size of the backup data upgraded at each step and the size of the target data of the new version firmware according to the size of the backup space. Therefore, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of the backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of the differential data (i.e. change in data amount) used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of storage spaces of various embedded systems are met.”, Page 5 line 6-9 “Therefore, in order to meet the software upgrading requirements of the embedded system with limited storage space, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of differential data used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces are met.”, where a size of a backup data pertaining to the firmware is determined/selected such that it accommodates the available backup space, where the determination/selection process is decomposed into a sub-upgrading processes to accommodate different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal to incorporate the teaching of Han to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of storing new version firmware while accommodating the backup space, as recognized by (Han Page 3 line 46-49).
Regarding claim 8, Aggarwal in view of Han taches the image processing apparatus according to claim 3.
Aggarwal does not explicitly disclose the below limitation.
Han discloses wherein the hardware processor selects all of the plurality of firmware types when the second storage section can store all of the plurality of firmware types (Han Page 2 line 44-46 “…a full coverage upgrade scheme. As shown in fig. 1, the main feature is to use the new version of software to completely overwrite the old version of software, and the disadvantage is that the new version of software needs to be completely downloaded to the local and then the downloaded upgrade package is overwritten to the target area, that is, the same size of storage space as the target area is needed during upgrading.”, Page 3 line 46-49 “…determining the size of the backup data upgraded at each step and the size of the target data of the new version firmware according to the size of the backup space. Therefore, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of the backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space…”, therefore, the process utilize the full size of the backup data if the backup space condition/size permits).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal to incorporate the teaching of Han to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of storing new version firmware while accommodating the backup space, as recognized by (Han Page 3 line 46-49).
Regarding claim 9, Aggarwal in view of Han taches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Aggarwal does not disclose the below limitation.
Han discloses wherein the hardware processor updates the plurality of firmware types stored in the first storage section, selects firmware to be stored as backup in the second storage section when the firmware in the first storage section is updated, and changes the firmware to be stored in the second storage section (Han Page 3 line 46-49 “…determining the size of the backup data upgraded at each step and the size of the target data of the new version firmware according to the size of the backup space. Therefore, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of the backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of the differential data (i.e. change in data amount) used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of storage spaces of various embedded systems are met.”, Page 5 line 6-9 “Therefore, in order to meet the software upgrading requirements of the embedded system with limited storage space, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of differential data used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces are met.”, where a size of a backup data pertaining to the firmware is determined/selected such that it accommodates the available backup space, where the determination/selection process is decomposed into a sub-upgrading processes to accommodate different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal to incorporate the teaching of Han to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of storing new version firmware while accommodating the backup space, as recognized by (Han Page 3 line 46-49).
Regarding clam 10, Aggarwal in view of Han taches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Aggarwal does not disclose the below limitation.
Han discloses wherein the hardware processor determines whether an apparatus state has changed at the time of activation, and when the apparatus state has changed, selects firmware to be stored as backup in the second storage section and changes the firmware to be stored in the second storage section (Han Page 3 line 46-49 “…determining the size of the backup data upgraded at each step and the size of the target data of the new version firmware according to the size of the backup space. Therefore, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of the backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of the differential data (i.e. change in data amount) used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of storage spaces of various embedded systems are met.”, Page 5 line 6-9 “Therefore, in order to meet the software upgrading requirements of the embedded system with limited storage space, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of differential data used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces are met.”, where a size of a backup data pertaining to the firmware is determined/selected such that it accommodates the available backup space during the process/activation, where the determination/selection process is decomposed into a sub-upgrading processes to accommodate different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces, where the apparatus state change corresponds to change in the backup data, which results into new version firmware processed at sub-upgrading process).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal to incorporate the teaching of Han to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of storing new version firmware while accommodating the backup space, as recognized by (Han Page 3 line 46-49).
Regarding claim 11, Aggarwal teaches a method for storing firmware as a backup in an image processing apparatus (Aggarwal Abstract “An apparatus to facilitate firmware resiliency in a computer system platform is disclosed.” Performing the method in Figure 4), the image processing apparatus comprising:
a first storage section that stores a plurality of firmware types to be started up in stages (Aggarwal Figure 3 250 storing primary firmware 310, where 310 comprises multiple pieces starting in stages as illustrated in Figure 4A, security firmware 410, then BIOS firmware 420, [0033] “At processing block 410, security firmware is loaded from primary firmware 310 and executed.”, [0034] “Upon a determination at decision block 415 that the security firmware has not been corrupted, BIOS firmware is loaded from primary firmware 310 and executed, processing block 420.”);
a second storage section that stores, as a backup, at least one of the plurality of firmware types (Aggarwal Figure 3 320 storing firmware copy 320 comprising copies of security firmware 410, and BIOS firmware 420, where one firmware is loaded from the secondary storage 320 to the firsts storage 250 upon a determination that the firmware is corrupted as illustrated in Figure 4AC 460 and Figure 4B 440, as disclosed in [0037-0038]); and
a hardware processor (Aggarwal Figure 3 security resiliency agent 330 in Figure 3 [0031] “…resiliency agent 330 performs an inspection of primary firmware 310 during a boot up process of platform 200 to determine whether primary firmware 310 has been detected. In such an embodiment, resiliency agent 330 initiates a recovery boot from secondary firmware storage 320 upon detecting that primary firmware 310 has been corrupted. FIGS. 4A-4D is a flow diagram illustrating one embodiment of a process performed by resiliency agent 330.”) that detects tampering with each of the plurality of firmware types stored in the first storage section (Aggarwal Figure 4A (415 and 425), where attack/unauthorized access is construed as a corrupted firmware as disclosed in [0026], where corrupted correspond to tampered) and, upon detection of tampering with a firmware, restores the tampered firmware using the firmware stored in the second storage section (Aggarwal Figure 4C 460 to restore security firmware 410 when corrupted, and Figure 4B 440 to restore BIOS firmware 420 when corrupted, further in [0026]),
Aggarwal does not disclose the below limitation.
Han discloses wherein the method comprises: selecting, at least one of the plurality of firmware types to be stored as a backup in the second storage section in accordance with an apparatus state; and changing firmware stored as backup in the second storage section according to the selection result (Han Page 3 line 46-49 “…determining the size of the backup data upgraded at each step and the size of the target data of the new version firmware according to the size of the backup space. Therefore, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of the backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of the differential data (i.e. change in data amount) used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of storage spaces of various embedded systems are met.”, Page 5 line 6-9 “Therefore, in order to meet the software upgrading requirements of the embedded system with limited storage space, in the software upgrading process of the embedded system, the size of backup data used for upgrading each time is flexibly determined according to the condition of the backup space, the size of differential data used for upgrading each time is further determined, and the whole one-time software upgrading process is decomposed into a plurality of sub-upgrading processes, so that different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces are met.”, where a size of a backup data pertaining to the firmware is determined/selected such that it accommodates the available backup space, where the determination/selection process is decomposed into a sub-upgrading processes to accommodate different requirements of various embedded system storage spaces).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal to incorporate the teaching of Han to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of storing new version firmware while accommodating the backup space, as recognized by (Han Page 3 line 46-49).
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 recites similar limitations to claim 11, therefore rejected with the same rationale and motivation applied to claim 11.
Regarding claim 13 (New), Aggarwal in view of Han taches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of firmware types includes a first firmware type to be executed first when the image processing apparatus is activated (Aggarwal Figure 4A illustrates initiating the process by sending a host message to start executing a security firmware in 410 then BIOS firmware 420 as disclosed in [0032]), and the at least one of the plurality of firmware types to be stored as backup in the second storage section includes the first firmware type ((Aggarwal Figure 3 320 storing firmware copy 320 comprising copies of security firmware 410, and BIOS firmware 420).
Claims 2 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aggarwal (US 20200226260 A1) in view of Han (CN 111124464 A) and Hoffner (US 20100248707 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Aggarwal in view of Han taches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Aggarwal in view of Han does not disclose the below limitation.
Hoffner discloses wherein the second storage section stores the firmware selected by the hardware processor in a non-rewritable storage area (Hoffner “[0045] Partitioning of the flash memory 114 provides several advantages. The memory partition may help to protect the secondary stack 130 from the unrecoverable fault that has corrupted the primary stack 128 of the programming of the wireless device 100. The backup or secondary program stack 130 would be burned in at the time of manufacture or of last valid update, after which the partition would prevent alteration of the data in the secondary stack 130 via normal operations via the primary stack 128. As a result, any errors or corruption that occurs in the program stack 122 in the primary partition would not affect the backup program stack 130 in the secondary partition.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal in view of Han to incorporate the teaching of Hoffner to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of ensuring that any errors or corruption that occurs in the primary program stack in the primary partition would not affect the backup program stack in the secondary partition, as recognized by (Hoffner [0045]).
Regarding claim 5, Aggarwal in view of Han taches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the hardware processor sets in advance prohibition or permission to acquire the plurality of firmware types from an external apparatus via a network (Aggarwal [0027] “…secondary firmware storage 320 may be implemented via universal flash storage (UFS) or NVMe. In further embodiments, secondary firmware storage 320 may be implemented as block storage or remote cloud storage (e.g., via cloud network 210 shown in FIG. 2C) that is accessed via an out of band (OOB) interface. In still further embodiments, the source of secondary firmware storage 320 may be dynamically selected (e.g., from UFS, NVMe, block storage, cloud storage, etc.). In such embodiments, one of these sources may be selected based on a configuration policy (i.e. policy set in advance to determine which source, e.g. cloud storage, to select, i.e. permitted to select, to acquire the corrupted firmware parts) for replacing local secondary firmware storage 320 upon a determination that the local secondary firmware storage 320 has been corrupted.”, [0028] “…resiliency agent 330 restores the primary firmware 310 by retrieving the firmware copy 325 from secondary firmware storage 320 (e.g., via OOB side channel 301) and overwriting the existing primary firmware 310 at non-volatile memory 250 with the firmware copy”).
Aggarwal in view of Han does not disclose the below limitation
Hoffner discloses selects the firmware to be stored as a backup in the second storage section based on the setting of prohibition or permission (Hoffner [0061] “…a download to a wireless device would essentially overwrite the corrupted (subject to the potentially unrecoverable error) primary program stack 128 with a new copy of the current update for that stack from the server 29. The download may similarly overwrite the secondary program stack 130.”, [0062] “… blocks or modules could be downloaded and overwritten sequentially until the error is corrected, which in some cases may not require an overwrite of the complete primary and secondary stacks.”, [0065] “…a repair operation may be performed where only the corrupted portion of the primary program stack 128 is corrected.”, [0068] “Over the air update capability can update the primary capability offered by stack 128. Over the air program downloading could also update the secondary program stack via FOTA and or recovery server 29. However, this would run the risk of corrupting the secondary program stack. In order to avoid such corruption, one possibility would be to prohibit update or other modification of the secondary program stack over the air. It may be prohibited on the device or on the network end.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal in view of Han to incorporate the teaching of Hoffner to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of control modification or update to the secondary program stack and avoid potential corruption, as recognized by (Hoffner [0068, 0082]).
Regarding claim 6, Aggarwal in view of Han and Hoffner the image processing apparatus according to claim 5.
Aggarwal in view of Han does not disclose the below limitation
Hoffner discloses wherein when acquisition of firmware from the external apparatus is prohibited, the hardware processor selects, as firmware to be stored as a backup in the second storage section, the firmware capable of notifying that tampering of the firmware has been detected (Hoffner [0061] “…a download to a wireless device would essentially overwrite the corrupted (subject to the potentially unrecoverable error) primary program stack 128 with a new copy of the current update for that stack from the server 29. The download may similarly overwrite the secondary program stack 130.”, [0062] “… blocks or modules could be downloaded and overwritten sequentially until the error is corrected, which in some cases may not require an overwrite of the complete primary and secondary stacks.”, [0065] “…a repair operation may be performed where only the corrupted portion of the primary program stack 128 is corrected.”, [0068] “Over the air update capability can update the primary capability offered by stack 128. Over the air program downloading could also update the secondary program stack via FOTA and or recovery server 29. However, this would run the risk of corrupting the secondary program stack. In order to avoid such corruption, one possibility would be to prohibit update or other modification of the secondary program stack over the air. It may be prohibited on the device or on the network end.”, [0082] “Download of a copy of the backup program could be permitted, but that may be prohibited to avoid potential corruption of the backup program.”, where Hoffner discloses the case where the secondary program stack in 130 of Figure 2 is prohibited from receiving update or other modification, and at the same time, Hoffner further discloses that the program, when executed, is capable of eliciting an error to be detected, as disclosed in e.g. [0013]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal in view of Han to incorporate the teaching of Hoffner to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of control modification or update to the secondary program stack and avoid potential corruption, as recognized by (Hoffner [0068, 0082]).
Regarding claim 7, Aggarwal in view of Han and Hoffner the image processing apparatus according to claim 5.
Aggarwal in view of Han does not disclose the below limitation
Hoffner discloses wherein when acquisition of firmware from the external apparatus is permitted, the hardware processor selects the firmware necessary for acquiring the firmware from the external apparatus and updating the firmware as the firmware to be stored as a backup in the second storage section (Hoffner [0061] “…a download to a wireless device would essentially overwrite the corrupted (subject to the potentially unrecoverable error) primary program stack 128 with a new copy of the current update for that stack from the server 29. The download may similarly overwrite the secondary program stack 130.”, [0062] “… blocks or modules could be downloaded and overwritten sequentially until the error is corrected, which in some cases may not require an overwrite of the complete primary and secondary stacks.”, [0065] “…a repair operation may be performed where only the corrupted portion of the primary program stack 128 is corrected.”, [0068] “Over the air update capability can update the primary capability offered by stack 128. Over the air program downloading could also update the secondary program stack via FOTA and or recovery server 29. However, this would run the risk of corrupting the secondary program stack. In order to avoid such corruption, one possibility would be to prohibit update or other modification of the secondary program stack over the air. It may be prohibited on the device or on the network end.”, [0082] “Download of a copy of the backup program could be permitted, but that may be prohibited to avoid potential corruption of the backup program.”, where Hoffner discloses the case where the secondary program stack in 130 of Figure 2 is permitted to receive update or other modification, and at the same time).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aggarwal in view of Han to incorporate the teaching of Hoffner to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of control modification or update to the secondary program stack, as recognized by (Hoffner [0068, 0082]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 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 and overcoming any potential objections or rejections.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior arts of record discloses the limitations in the manner recited in claim 14. Particularly, the recited firmware types and the conditional backup selection of the firmware types other than the application firmware.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BASSAM A NOAMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2705. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM-5:00PM.
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, Eleni A. Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-3867. 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.
/BASSAM A NOAMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2497
Prosecution Insights