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. 18/939,055 filed on November 6, 2024, presents claims 1-12 for examination, claims foreign priority to CN202311525152.9, filed on 11/15/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/16/2025 and on 7/14/2026, 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 5-12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5, last line, “carry out any of the methods according to claim 1”, suggestion: - carry out the method according to claim 1-
Claims 6-12 have the same issue and are objected to for the same reason.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
With respect to claim 1, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to a method claim under Step 1.
Under Prong 1, Step 2A:
However, the limitations of claim 1,
“determining a target folder to be mounted, traversing directory structure information of the target folder, generating descriptive information matching a specified image format based on the directory structure information, traversing file data information of the target folder, and generating a mapping table matching the specified image format based on the file data information;
generating, [in a data cache area], image format information in the specified image format based on the descriptive information, and mapping file data of the target folder to image data in the specified image format based on the mapping table;”
as drafted, are functions that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, recite the abstract idea of a mental process. The limitations encompass a human mind carrying out the functions through observation, evaluation, judgment and /or opinion, or even with the aid of pen and paper. E.g. the user can manually determine a target folder to be mounted, can manually traverse directory structure information, can manually generate descriptive information, can manually traverse file data information, and can manually generate a mapping table, can manually generate image format information, can manually map file data of the target folder to image data as defined in the claim. Thus, these limitations recite and fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas under Prong 1 Step 2A.
Under Prong 2, Step 2A:
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the following additional elements
“a management server”, “a data cache area” and
“mounting the target folder to be mounted in the specified image format based on image header information and the image data.”
Wherein “a management server”, “a data cache area” are cited as a generic computer system or a computer component, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. “mounting the target folder to be mounted in the specified image format based on image header information and the image data” is merely using a computer as tools to implement the identified abstract idea; thus, not indicative of an integration into a practical application.
Under Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element “a management server”, “a data cache area” that are mere use of generic computer to implement the abstract idea, thus, is not an inventive concept. “mounting the target folder to be mounted in the specified image format based on image header information and the image data” is merely using a computer as a tool to implement the identified abstract idea, does not constitute an inventive concept. Accordingly, even viewed as whole, the claim does not appear to be patent eligible under 35 USC 101.
With respect to claim 2, “wherein the specified image format is an ISO image format, and the image format information comprises a primary volume descriptor, a volume descriptor set terminator, a path table record, a file descriptor and a directory.” as drafted, is merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception, and does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. See MPEP § 2106.05(h).
With respect to claim 3, “wherein the specified image format is an ISO image format, and the mapping table comprises a file path, a starting logical block address (LBA) corresponding to a file, a file size, and a partition capacity.” as drafted, is merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception, and does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. See MPEP § 2106.05(h).
With respect to claim 4, “wherein the partition capacity is a positive integer multiple of a sector size, and an unused space of a partition corresponding to the partition capacity exceeding a stored file size is filled with preset data.” as drafted, is merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception, and does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. See MPEP § 2106.05(h).
With respect to claim 5, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to an electronic device claim under Step 1.
This claim recites an electronic device to implement a method that is disclosed in claim 1 and therefore recites the same abstract idea as claim 1, please see the office action analysis regarding claim 1.
Claim 5 recites more additional elements, i.e. an electronic device, a processor, and a machine-readable storage medium. But these additional elements are generic computer elements in the computer system, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
With respect to claim 6, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to an electronic device claim under Step 1.
This claim recites an electronic device to implement a method that is disclosed in claim 2 and therefore recites the same abstract idea as claim 2, please see the office action analysis regarding claim 2.
Claim 6 recites more additional elements, i.e. an electronic device, a processor, and a machine-readable storage medium. But these additional elements are generic computer elements in the computer system, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
With respect to claim 7, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to an electronic device claim under Step 1.
This claim recites an electronic device to implement a method that is disclosed in claim 3 and therefore recites the same abstract idea as claim 3, please see the office action analysis regarding claim 3.
Claim 7 recites more additional elements, i.e. an electronic device, a processor, and a machine-readable storage medium. But these additional elements are generic computer elements in the computer system, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
With respect to claim 8, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to an electronic device claim under Step 1.
This claim recites an electronic device to implement a method that is disclosed in claim 4 and therefore recites the same abstract idea as claim 4, please see the office action analysis regarding claim 4.
Claim 8 recites more additional elements, i.e. an electronic device, a processor, and a machine-readable storage medium. But these additional elements are generic computer elements in the computer system, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
With respect to claim 9, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium claim under Step 1.
This claim recites a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium to implement a method that is disclosed in claim 1 and therefore recites the same abstract idea as claim 1, please see the office action analysis regarding claim 1.
Claim 9 recites more additional elements, i.e. a processor, and a machine-readable storage medium. But these additional elements are generic computer elements in the computer system, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
With respect to claim 10, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium claim under Step 1.
This claim recites a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium to implement a method that is disclosed in claim 2 and therefore recites the same abstract idea as claim 2, please see the office action analysis regarding claim 2.
Claim 10 recites more additional elements, i.e. a processor, and a machine-readable storage medium. But these additional elements are generic computer elements in the computer system, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
With respect to claim 11, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium claim under Step 1.
This claim recites a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium to implement a method that is disclosed in claim 3 and therefore recites the same abstract idea as claim 3, please see the office action analysis regarding claim 3.
Claim 11 recites more additional elements, i.e. a processor, and a machine-readable storage medium. But these additional elements are generic computer elements in the computer system, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
With respect to claim 12, This claim is within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium claim under Step 1.
This claim recites a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium to implement a method that is disclosed in claim 4 and therefore recites the same abstract idea as claim 4, please see the office action analysis regarding claim 4.
Claim 12 recites more additional elements, i.e. a processor, and a machine-readable storage medium. But these additional elements are generic computer elements in the computer system, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
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 1-2, 5-6, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20100250825 A1, hereinafter “Chen” cited from IDS filed 6/16/2025) in view of SONG et al. (CN 113918519 A, hereinafter “SONG” cited from IDS filed 6/16/2025, please refer to the attached NPL copy).
With respect to claim 1, Chen discloses A method for mounting an image, applied to a management server, the method comprises:
generating, in a data cache area, image format information in the specified image format based on the descriptive information, and mapping file data of the target folder to image data in the specified image format based on the mapping table (e.g. para [0043], “FIG. 4 illustrates an organizational structure in a virtual device image according to an exemplary embodiment. In FIG. 4, file A1, file B1, and file B2 are located outside of the virtual device image. A record 402 of the file A1 in the virtual device image, which may be either a directory record or a record in another form, points to the corresponding file A1 via a pointer (dashed line) 401. Similarly, records of the files B1 and B2 respectively point to the corresponding files B1 and B2.” Wherein the directory structure reads on the specified image format. Fig. 5 and corresponding text in para [0045], “… The logical block address table 502 is a set of maps between block addresses and the real positions of the related data (contents of directories and specific contents of files).” Wherein the table 502 reads on the mapping table);
mounting the target folder to be mounted in the specified image format based on image header information and the image data (e.g. para [0048], “… at step S607, the created virtual device image 501 is mounted to a local or remote host. …” Fig. 7 shows virtual image with header information).
Chen does not appear to explicitly disclose
determining a target folder to be mounted, traversing directory structure information of the target folder, generating descriptive information matching a specified image format based on the directory structure information, traversing file data information of the target folder, and generating a mapping table matching the specified image format based on the file data information;
However, this is taught in analogous art, SONG (e.g. p4, third paragraph, “In this embodiment, the user can pass through the browser of the terminal device dragging the folder to the appointed area,…. and the terminal device only the folder directory to be uploaded in the memory according to ISO9660 standard and Joliet extension protocol in the memory to generate directory index data, …” wherein ISO9660 reads on the specified image format, the directory index data read on descriptive information. P4 fifth paragraph, “As shown in FIG. 2, the directory index data includes but is not limited to system reserved area(System Reserved Area), primary Volume Descriptor (Primary Volume Descriptor). Enhanced Volume Descriptor, Volume Descriptor Set Terminator, path table (PathTable), file and directory description head (File and Directory Descriptors).” P4 last paragraph, “Specifically, the path table comprises the position information of each sub-file in each file folder and file folder to be uploaded; …” wherein the path table reads on a mapping table.)
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 Chen with the invention of SONG because it provides techniques for reducing the time taken by the hanging file folder. 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 reducing the time taken by the hanging file folder as suggested by SONG (see Contents of the Invention, p2 last to p3 first paragraph).
With respect to claim 2, Chen discloses wherein the specified image format is an ISO image format, and the image format information comprises a primary volume descriptor, a volume descriptor set terminator, a path table record, a file descriptor and a directory (e.g. Figs. 2-4, para [0007], “FIG. 2 illustrates a main structure of an ISO 9660 file system, i.e., logical sector. A logical sector is divided into several logical parts. The first part is the reserved field. Although not clearly defined in the ISO 9660 specification, the reserved field generally is used to store boot information. The second part is the volume descriptor, which includes the ISO 9660 file system information. Other kinds of descriptors optionally can be used to record non-ISO file system information following the volume descriptor. Following the non-ISO file system information is a volume contents part comprising directory information such as a root directory, root directory files, a subdirectory, subdirectory files, etc.”).
With respect to claim 5, it is directed to an electronic device to implement the method disclosed in claim 1, please see the rejections directed to claim 1 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 5. Note that, Chen teaches An electronic device, comprising a processor and a machine-readable storage medium, wherein the machine-readable storage medium stores machine-executable instructions therein that can be executed by the processor, and the processor executes the machine-executable instructions to carry out any of the methods according to claim 1 (Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 6, it is directed to an electronic device to implement the method disclosed in claim 2, please see the rejections directed to claim 2 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 6. Note that, Chen teaches An electronic device, comprising a processor and a machine-readable storage medium, wherein the machine-readable storage medium stores machine-executable instructions therein that can be executed by the processor, and the processor executes the machine-executable instructions to carry out any of the methods according to claim 2 (Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 9, it is directed to A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium to implement the method disclosed in claim 1, please see the rejections directed to claim 1 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 9. Note that, Chen teaches A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium storing machine-executable instructions therein, wherein the machine-executable instructions, when invoked and executed by a processor, cause the processor to carry out any of the methods according to claim 1 (Fig. 10, ROM, RAM, or storage unit).
With respect to claim 10, it is directed to A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium to implement the method disclosed in claim 2, please see the rejections directed to claim 2 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 10. Note that, Chen teaches A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium storing machine-executable instructions therein, wherein the machine-executable instructions, when invoked and executed by a processor, cause the processor to carry out any of the methods according to claim 2 (Fig. 10, ROM, RAM, or storage unit).
Claims 3, 7, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20100250825 A1, hereinafter “Chen” cited from IDS filed 6/16/2025) in view of SONG et al. (CN 113918519 A, hereinafter “SONG” cited from IDS filed 6/16/2025, please refer to the attached NPL copy) as applied to claim 1, in further view of DU (CN 117289956 A, hereinafter “DU”, please refer to the attached NPL copy).
With respect to claim 3, Chen as modified by SONG discloses The method according to claim 1, Chen discloses wherein the specified image format is an ISO image format, and the mapping table comprises a file path, a starting logical block address (LBA) corresponding to a file, a file size, and [a partition capacity] (e.g. Fig. 5, and corresponding text in para [0045-0047], wherein the logical address table 502 reads on the mapping table which comprises a file path, starting LBA, file size. But does not appear to explicitly disclose a partition capacity. However, this is taught in analogous art, DU (e.g. p5 fifth paragraph, “S301: creating a blank mirror image file according to the partition capacity information;”).
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 DU because it provides techniques for creating a mirror image file according to the appointed partition
requirement, which solves the problem that the mirror image file is too large in the whole disc copying process, and saves the storage space. 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 creating a mirror image file according to the appointed partition requirement, which solves the problem that the mirror image file is too large in the whole disc copying process, and saves the storage space as suggested by DU (see Abstract).
With respect to claim 7, it is directed to an electronic device to implement the method disclosed in claim 3, please see the rejections directed to claim 3 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 7. Note that, Chen teaches An electronic device, comprising a processor and a machine-readable storage medium, wherein the machine-readable storage medium stores machine-executable instructions therein that can be executed by the processor, and the processor executes the machine-executable instructions to carry out any of the methods according to claim 3 (Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 11, it is directed to A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium to implement the method disclosed in claim 3, please see the rejections directed to claim 3 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 11. Note that, Chen teaches A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium storing machine-executable instructions therein, wherein the machine-executable instructions, when invoked and executed by a processor, cause the processor to carry out any of the methods according to claim 3 (Fig. 10, ROM, RAM, or storage unit).
Claims 4, 8, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20100250825 A1, hereinafter “Chen” cited from IDS filed 6/16/2025) in view of SONG et al. (CN 113918519 A, hereinafter “SONG” cited from IDS filed 6/16/2025, please refer to the attached NPL copy) and DU (CN 117289956 A, hereinafter “DU”, please refer to the attached NPL copy) as applied to claim 3, in further view of UNANNOUNCED (CN 114253672 A, hereinafter “UNANNOUNCED”, please refer to the attached NPL copy).
With respect to claim 4, Chen as modified by SONG and DU discloses The method according to claim 3, DU further discloses wherein the partition capacity is a positive integer multiple of a sector size (e.g. p5 last paragraph, “… The size of the blank mirror image file to be created can be calculated. The reserved capacity of the target disk can be obtained by the sector-size method in the DiskPart tool. For example, the length of the /dev/sdbl partition is 15G, the length of the /dev/sdb2partition is 10G, the reserved space of the head and the tail of the target disk obtained by invoking the sector-size method is 5G, The size of the blank mirror image file thus calculated is: 15 G + 10 G + 5 G= 30 G.” one of ordinary skill in the art understand that the partition capacity is integer multiple of a sector size. For motivation to combine, please refer to office action regarding claim 3 above), but does not appear to explicitly disclose and an unused space of a partition corresponding to the partition capacity exceeding a stored file size is filled with preset data. However, this is taught in analogous art, UNANNOUNCED (e.g. p2 fifth paragraph under Contents of the Invention, “… when the virtual machine running on the Hypervisor is started, judging whether it has a data storage partition; if it has, initializing the storage data of the data storage partition, …” wherein initializing reads on filling with preset data, one of ordinary skill in the art understands that the unused space of the partition would be filled with preset data).
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 UNANNOUNCED because it provides techniques for initializing storage partitions to improve the security of the data storage and the sharing property. 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 initializing storage partitions to improve the security of the data storage and the sharing property as suggested by UNANNOUNCED (see p2 third to tenth paragraphs).
With respect to claim 8, it is directed to an electronic device to implement the method disclosed in claim 4, please see the rejections directed to claim 4 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 8. Note that, Chen teaches An electronic device, comprising a processor and a machine-readable storage medium, wherein the machine-readable storage medium stores machine-executable instructions therein that can be executed by the processor, and the processor executes the machine-executable instructions to carry out any of the methods according to claim 4 (Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 12, it is directed to A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium to implement the method disclosed in claim 4, please see the rejections directed to claim 4 above which also cover the limitations recited in claim 12. Note that, Chen teaches A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium storing machine-executable instructions therein, wherein the machine-executable instructions, when invoked and executed by a processor, cause the processor to carry out any of the methods according to claim 4 (Fig. 10, ROM, RAM, or storage unit).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. For example, Liu et al., US 20210011885 A1 teaches container image processing method and apparatus, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.
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