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 .
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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2,8 and 11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1,7-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,324. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because following observation is made:
Instant application
Patent No. 12,254,324
1. A device comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memory storing instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, configure the device to: receive a request for an operational mode in which a second device configured to be located in a retail environment and to provide an interface to a user also located in the retail environment the second device is to be operated, wherein the operational mode is one of a plurality of operational modes each corresponding to a respective set of software layers that controls a configuration of the second device and allows operations of the second device according to the configuration; and transmit an indication of the operational mode to the second device.
2. The device of claim 1, wherein the instructions further configure the device to: transmit a set of software layers that corresponds to the operational mode to the second device.
8. The device of claim 2, wherein the set of software layers includes a layer configured to control at least one of software interactions or hardware movements.
1. A device comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memory storing instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, configure the device to: start a boot-up process; during the boot-up process: responsive to a triggering event on the device and changing a state of the device, send to a server, via a network, a request for an operational mode in which the device is to be operated, wherein the operational mode is one of a plurality of operational modes each corresponding to a respective set of software layers that controls a configuration of the device and allows operations of the device according to the configuration; receive, from the server via the network, an indication of the operational mode; determine a set of software layers corresponding to the operational mode; assemble, by the device, the set of software layers to define a file system; transfer control of the device to the file system; and control, using the file system, a component of the device based on the operational mode such that the component morphs the device into the configuration.
7. The device of claim 6, wherein the first software layer allows for at least one of: the one or more processors to process user interaction with a hardware peripheral of the device, the hardware peripheral to be moved relative to a housing of the device, or a user interface of the hardware peripheral to present a set of elements.
11. A method comprising: receive a request for an operational mode in which a second device configured to be located in a retail environment and to provide an interface to a user also located in the retail environment the second device is to be operated, wherein the operational mode is one of a plurality of operational modes each corresponding to a respective set of software layers that controls a configuration of the second device and allows operations of the second device according to the configuration; and transmit an indication of the operational mode to the second device.
8. A method for loading a file system into a device having volatile memory and non-volatile memory, the method comprising: responsive to a triggering event on the device and changing a state of the device, sending, to a server via a network, a request for an operational mode in which the device is to be operated, wherein the operational mode is one of a plurality of operational modes each corresponding to a respective set of software layers that controls a configuration of the device and allows operations of the device according to the configuration; receiving, from the server via the network, an indication of the operational mode; determining a set of software layers corresponding to the operational mode; assembling, by the device, the set of software layers to define the file system; transferring control of the device to the file system; and controlling, using the file system, a component of the device based on the operational mode such that the component morphs the device into the configuration
As demonstrated, the claims 1,7-8 and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,324 disclose all the features of claims 1-2,8 and 11 of the instant application with minor obvious variations. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art having the claims 1,7-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,324 to modify the claims to achieve the features of claims 1-2,8 and 11 of the instant application. Claims of instant application recite the server-side mirror image of interactions claimed in device side using identical or near identical definitional language for “operational mode,” software layers,” and” repository,” There is no patentably distinct feature separating the pending claims from the scope already secured in the patent 12,254,324. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the server-side claim as necessary complement of the already patented device side claim.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 1-9,11-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards (Pub NO. US 2013/0191230) in view of Suarez et al. (Pub No. US 2017/0177860)
Regarding Claim 1 Edwards teaches: a device [Fig.1 and Fig.2] comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memory storing instructions [FIG. 2, method 200 ("mode configuring manager"): "implemented as instructions programmed and residing on a non-transitory computer-readable (processor-readable) storage medium and executed by one or more processors." Also FIG. 4, system 400, element 401: "A server includes the mode configuring manager 401; the server is a physical machine or a Virtual Machine (VM) accessible over a network.] that, upon execution by the one or more processors, configure the device to: receive a request for an operational mode in which a second device configured to be located in a retail environment and to provide an interface to a user also located in the retail environment the second device is to be operated, [FIG. 1 discussion: "As POS applications become more flexible... A POS with a SCO 'mode' selects an alternate workflow and UI representation..." and FIG. 3/step 322: "the mode configuring agent receives the authorized command over a network connection from a mode configuring manager" — i.e., the checkout station (second device, presenting an interface to a customer/cashier in the retail environment) communicates with the server-side manager to establish mode.] wherein the operational mode is one of a plurality of operational modes each corresponding to a respective set of software ….that controls a configuration of the second device and allows operations of the second device according to the configuration; [Step 257: "the mode configuring manager identifies the first mode as a self-service mode of operation and the second mode of operation as a cashier-assisted mode of operation." Step 251: "common layered processing that is common to both the first and second workflows are included in the first and second workflows."] and transmit an indication of the operational mode to the second device. [Step 260: "the mode configuring manager sends a command to a mode configuring agent processing on the checkout station for purposes of initiating the checkout station in the first mode of operation." Step 261: "subsequently sends another command to the mode configuring agent... for purposes of initiating the checkout station in the second mode of operation." Step 270: "the mode configuring manager issues a command to a mode configuring agent processing on the checkout station to dynamically switch from a current first mode of operation to the second mode of operation."]
Edwards does not explicitly teach “Software layers”
However Suarez teaches: software layer [0027] each layer of the container image 152 may correspond to a step in the build process of the container image 152 as a whole. One or more base layers of the container image 152 may comprise the operating system used to execute other software..."]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to which this invention pertains before the effective filing date of the invention to use the software layer of Suarez in Edwards’s system.
Using a software layer instead of a full software overhaul or a complete software suite to perform a task offers significant advantages in speed, cost, and flexibility.
Regarding Claim 2 Edwards teaches: transmit a set of software layers that corresponds to the operational mode to the second device. [steps 255/256 — "pushes the first and second interfaces and the first and second workflows as a self-loading and installing package on the checkout station" / "configures the package to initially default and start the checkout station in the first mode of operation."]
Regarding Claim 3 Edwards teaches: receive a second request from the second device requesting the set of software layers; and responsive to receiving the second request, transmit the set of software layers. [steps 255/256 — "pushes the first and second interfaces and the first and second workflows as a self-loading and installing package on the checkout station" / "configures the package to initially default and start the checkout station in the first mode of operation." ]
Regarding Claim 4 Suarez teaches: the set of software layers includes at least a first layer and a second layer and the first layer may be transmitted to the second device before, during, or after the second layer is transmitted to the second device. [the manifest specifies which layers are associated with the container image, and thus, when a new container image is uploaded, it can be determined from the manifest which layers of the image may or may not already be stored in the registry 302]
Regarding Claim 5 combination of Edwards and Suarez teaches: the instructions further configure the device to :receive a second request for at least one layer of the set of software layers from the second device after transmitting the set of software layers. [Edwards: step 251 — integration of "same sub workflow components" implies modular, separately-portable components. Suarez: the manifest specifies which layers are associated with the container image, and thus, when a new container image is uploaded, it can be determined from the manifest which layers of the image may or may not already be stored in the registry 302]
Regarding Claim 6 Suraez teaches: the set of software layers includes a compressed file system in a layer. [[0027]"each layer of the container image 152 may correspond to a step in the build process of the container image 152 as a whole. One or more base layers of the container image 152 may comprise the operating system used to execute other software..."]
Regarding Claim 7 Suraez teaches: the compressed file system includes a preconfigured configuration for at least one application. [[0027]"each layer of the container image 152 may correspond to a step in the build process of the container image 152 as a whole. One or more base layers of the container image 152 may comprise the operating system used to execute other software..."]
Regarding Claim 8 Edwards teaches: the set of software layers includes a layer configured to control at least one of software interactions or hardware movements. [Background section — "different device interface layers, different User Interface (UI) engines" — ties layers to device/UI control.]
Regarding Claim 9 Edwards teaches: the instructions further configure the device to:receive the set of software layers and the indication of the operational mode assigned to the second device from a third device. [FIG. 4, elements 401/402 — manager (server) and agent (checkout station) are separate devices, with the manager capable of running "via one or more cloud processing environments," i.e., distributed/third-device sourcing.]
Regarding Claim 11 Edwards teachesA method comprising: receive a request for an operational mode in which a second device configured to be located in a retail environment and to provide an interface to a user also located in the retail environment the second device is to be operated, [FIG. 1 discussion: "As POS applications become more flexible... A POS with a SCO 'mode' selects an alternate workflow and UI representation..." and FIG. 3/step 322: "the mode configuring agent receives the authorized command over a network connection from a mode configuring manager" — i.e., the checkout station (second device, presenting an interface to a customer/cashier in the retail environment) communicates with the server-side manager to establish mode.]
wherein the operational mode is one of a plurality of operational modes each corresponding to a respective set of software layers that controls a configuration of the second device and allows operations of the second device according to the configuration; [Step 257: "the mode configuring manager identifies the first mode as a self-service mode of operation and the second mode of operation as a cashier-assisted mode of operation." Step 251: "common layered processing that is common to both the first and second workflows are included in the first and second workflows."] and
transmit an indication of the operational mode to the second device. [Step 260: "the mode configuring manager sends a command to a mode configuring agent processing on the checkout station for purposes of initiating the checkout station in the first mode of operation." Step 261: "subsequently sends another command to the mode configuring agent... for purposes of initiating the checkout station in the second mode of operation." Step 270: "the mode configuring manager issues a command to a mode configuring agent processing on the checkout station to dynamically switch from a current first mode of operation to the second mode of operation."]
Regarding Claim 12 Edwards teaches: the operational mode is requested during a boot process of the second device. [[0018] SCO mode may be established by installing configuration settings so as to allow the POS to understand that the SCO mode is to be entered at startup on a particular lane]
Regarding Claim 13 Edwards teaches: the indication of the operational mode includes a second indication of a set of software layers included in the respective set of software layers that correspond to the operational mode. [steps 255/256 — "pushes the first and second interfaces and the first and second workflows as a self-loading and installing package on the checkout station" / "configures the package to initially default and start the checkout station in the first mode of operation."]
Regarding Claim 14 Edwards teaches: transmitting a set of software layers that corresponds to the operational mode to the second device before receiving the request. [steps 255/256 — "pushes the first and second interfaces and the first and second workflows as a self-loading and installing package on the checkout station" / "configures the package to initially default and start the checkout station in the first mode of operation.”]
Regarding Claim 14 Edwards teaches: the indication of the operational mode is determined based at least in part on an association between the second device and the operation mode. [FIG. 4, elements 401/402 — manager (server) and agent (checkout station) are separate devices, with the manager capable of running "via one or more cloud processing environments," i.e., distributed/third-device sourcing.]
Regarding Claim 17 Edwards teaches: One or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media storing instructions that, upon execution by one or more processors of a system, cause the system to perform operations [[0024] according to an example embodiment. The method 100 (hereinafter "mode configuring manager") is implemented as instructions programmed and residing on a non-transitory computer-readable (processor-readable) storage medium and executed by one or more processors.] comprising: receiving a request for an operational mode in which a second device configured to be located in a retail environment and to provide an interface to a user also located in the retail environment the second device is to be operated, [FIG. 1 discussion: "As POS applications become more flexible... A POS with a SCO 'mode' selects an alternate workflow and UI representation..." and FIG. 3/step 322: "the mode configuring agent receives the authorized command over a network connection from a mode configuring manager" — i.e., the checkout station (second device, presenting an interface to a customer/cashier in the retail environment) communicates with the server-side manager to establish mode.] wherein the operational mode is one of a plurality of operational modes each corresponding to a respective set of software layers that controls a configuration of the second device and allows operations of the second device according to the configuration; [Step 257: "the mode configuring manager identifies the first mode as a self-service mode of operation and the second mode of operation as a cashier-assisted mode of operation." Step 251: "common layered processing that is common to both the first and second workflows are included in the first and second workflows."] and transmitting an indication of the operational mode to the second device. [Step 260: "the mode configuring manager sends a command to a mode configuring agent processing on the checkout station for purposes of initiating the checkout station in the first mode of operation." Step 261: "subsequently sends another command to the mode configuring agent... for purposes of initiating the checkout station in the second mode of operation." Step 270: "the mode configuring manager issues a command to a mode configuring agent processing on the checkout station to dynamically switch from a current first mode of operation to the second mode of operation."]
Regarding Claim 18 Edwards teaches: transmitting a set of software layers that corresponds to the operational mode to the second device. . [steps 255/256 — "pushes the first and second interfaces and the first and second workflows as a self-loading and installing package on the checkout station" / "configures the package to initially default and start the checkout station in the first mode of operation.”]
Regarding Claim 19 Edwards teaches: receiving a second request from the second device requesting the set of software layers; and responsive to receiving the second request, transmitting the set of software layers. . [steps 255/256 — "pushes the first and second interfaces and the first and second workflows as a self-loading and installing package on the checkout station" / "configures the package to initially default and start the checkout station in the first mode of operation.”]
Regarding Claim 20 Edwards teaches: control at least one of software interactions or hardware movements. [Background section — "different device interface layers, different User Interface (UI) engines" — ties layers to device/UI control.]
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards (Pub NO. US 2013/0191230) in view of Suarez et al. (Pub No. US 2017/0177860) further in view of Stopel et al. (Stopel) (Pub No. US 2017/0116415)
Regarding Claim 10, combination of Edwards and Suarez does not teach the set of software layers includes at least a first layer and is used by the second device to replace a compromised layer.
However, Stopel teaches set of software layers includes at least a first layer and is used by the second device to replace a compromised layer. [[0010] The layers 215 are read-only layers... When the software container 200 is deleted, the writable container layer 220 is also deleted, and the base image 210 remains unchanged" — i.e., compromised/writable layers are discarded and replaced from the unchanged, read-only base image, which is the same "reboot removes compromised layer and reloads clean layer]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to which this invention pertains before the effective filing date of the invention to replace the software layer in Suarez’s system using Stopel’s teaching to improve processing speed and efficiency
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards (Pub NO. US 2013/0191230) in view of Suarez et al. (Pub No. US 2017/0177860) further in view of Tan et al. (Tan) (Pub No. US 2022/0012106)
Regarding claim 16 the combination of Edwards and Suarez does not teach respective set of software layers and are updated periodically.
However, Tan teaches respective set of software layers are updated periodically [[0024] dynamically evolve or orchestrate an API execution recipe and adjust the depth of software layers needed to expose a hardware feature/function interface to software application.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to which this invention pertains before the effective filing date of the invention to update software layers of Suarez using Tan’s teaching to improve performance and enhance security.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
-Prior art Kim et al. (Pub No. US 2015/0234678) teaches setting first operating system (OS) among a set of OSs such that the first OS is executed in first mode state Second OS is se among the OSs such that the second OS is executed in second mode state. A control item executable by the second OS is displayed in the first mode state while the first mode state is executed by the first OS. A control action corresponding to the control item is performed under the second mode state in response to receiving an input relating to the control item.
-Prior art Zimmer et al. (Pub NO. US 2024/0193867) teaches method and system for acquiring boot options from a plurality of servers on a network and selectively booting from one of the boot options. A client issues a boot option request to servers on a network. The client receives boot option offers from a plurality of servers where a boot option offer identifies the boot options available from a particular server. A boot option is selected at the client. The bootable image corresponding to the selected boot option is retrieved by the client via the server.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAHID CHOUDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-5153. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Andrew J Jung can be reached at 571-270-3779. 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.
/ZAHID CHOUDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175
Prosecution Insights