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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claim recites the limitation of “substantially”. Such term is indefinite.
Conclusion
A. Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-34 and 36-40 are allowable.
The primary reasons for allowance of claim 21 in the instant application is the combination with the inclusion in these claims that “receive an instruction to deploy operating system software to a computing instance of the computing service, wherein the instruction specifies one or more additional features or updates to be included in the operating system software; cause the block-based storage service to provide a first volume for attachment to the computing instance to enable deployment of a base portion of the operating system software; and cause the block-based storage service to provide one or more other volumes for attachment to the computing instance to enable deployment of the additional features or updates; wherein: read operations are performed on the first volume attached to the computing instance to deploy the base portion of the operating system software on the computing instance; and read operations are performed on the one or more other volumes attached to the computing instance to deploy the additional features or updates for the operating system on the computing instance”. The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combination.
The primary reasons for allowance of claim 28 in the instant application is the combination with the inclusion in these claims that “receiving instructions to deploy operating system software, to one or more computing instances of a computing service; attaching, to each of the one or more computing instances, a first block-storage volume comprising instructions for installing a base portion of the operating system software; attaching, to each of the one or more computing instances, one or more other block-storage volumes comprising additional instructions for installing additional portions of the operation system software; and installing the operating system software, wherein: read operations are performed on the first volume and on the one or more other volumes in order to install the operation system software”. The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combination.
The primary reasons for allowance of claim 37 in the instant application is the combination with the inclusion in these claims that “provide a first multi-attach volume for attachment to a set of computing instances to receive deployment of operating system software; and provide one or more other multi-attach volumes for attachment to the set of computing instances to receive deployment of additional software, wherein: read operations are performed on the first multi-attach volume to deploy the operating system software to the set of computing instances and are performed on the one or more other multi-attach volumes to deploy the additional software to the set of computing instances”. The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combination.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's response must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(b) and § 707.07(a) of the MPEP.
B. Claims Rejected
Claim 35 is rejected.
C. Direction for Future Remarks
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAE UN YU whose telephone number is (571)272-1133. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Tim Vo can be reached on (571)272-3642. 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.
/JAE U YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2138
Prosecution Insights