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 .
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant’s Communication received 3/12/2025 for application number 19/110,911. The Office hereby acknowledges receipt of the following and placed of record in file: Specification, Drawings, Abstract, Oath/Declaration, claims, and certified copy of foreign priority application.
Claims 1-6 and 11-22 are presented for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Drawings
Examiner contends that the drawings filed 3/12/2025 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claims 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
As per claim 17, the claim recites a “computer-readable storage medium.” Applicant's specification does not define the form of a "storage medium," therefore the broadest reasonable interpretation of the storage media may comprise a series of computer instructions encoded within a propagated signal. A propagated signal cannot properly be classified in any of the statutory categories of machine, article of manufacture, process, or composition of matter. Therefore, the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Applicant can however introduce the term "a non-transitory" into the claims to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 11-14, 16-20 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (hereinafter as Jiang) PGPUB 2006/0238791, and further in view of Lee PGPUB 2004/0030415.
As per claim 1, Jiang teaches a method for automatically configuring hardware resources of a driver, comprising:
reading device model information in a configuration file [0014: (dynamic device table 22 is loaded; it is thus stored in memory and is a file) and 0012-0013: (device table entry of the table 22 includes device identifier of the device 12 such as product ID (model information) which may be read through SCSI command)];
matching corresponding hardware resource configuration information according to the device model information [0013, and 0015-0016: (determines product identifiers and device configuration information such as through SCSI command, and determines whether the existing device driver table 14 supports the device identified by the device information (matching the device model information/product identifier to the hardware resource configuration information/device configuration information product data stored in device table 14))], the hardware resource configuration information comprising description information of the hardware resources [0012-0014: (device configuration information (hardware resource configuration information) includes information of hardware resources such as port affinity and element locations)]; and
executing loading function of the hardware resource configuration information [0014-0015: (invoking the loading of dynamic device table 22 into memory)], and loading the hardware resource configuration information into the driver [0016: (provides the obtained device information to the device driver 10 that holds the device table 14)].
Jiang does not explicitly teach matching a loading function of the hardware resource configuration information according to the device model information. Although Jiang describes matching hardware information to the device model information and invoking and loading a driver package and its corresponding device configuration information, Jiang does not explicitly mention matching loading function to the model information.
Lee teaches controlling drivers based on identifiers. Lee is thus similar to Jiang. Lee further teaches matching a loading function of the hardware resource configuration information according to the device model information [0041-0042: (device handler ID (model information) identifies the device and DCB contains a pointer fpInitDevice to its initialization function), and 0060 and 0074: (using the device handler ID, the function in the device driver’s function table is identified and called/loaded (e.g. fpInitDevice))]. Lee teaches matching an identifier to calling functions, and executing a function based on the identifier to change drivers.
The combination of Jiang with Lee leads to Jiang matching the product identifier with device configuration information and the product identifier with the pointer call function to initialize and load driver.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Lee’s teachings of using a pointer to call a function to configure a driver based on the identifier in Jiang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a pointer to call the function for loading and changing the driver in Jiang because it provides a flexible structure for quickly referencing or accessing various functions including changing or adding information to the drivers.
As per claim 2, Jiang and Lee teach the method for automatically configuring hardware resources of a driver according to claim 1, wherein executing the loading function of the hardware resource configuration information, and loading the hardware resource configuration information into the driver comprises: executing the loading function of the hardware resource configuration information [Jiang 0014-0015], and invoking an injection function of the driver, a pointer of the injection function of the driver pointing to a position of the hardware resource configuration information [Lee 0042, 0046, 0049-0052, and 0060]; and loading the hardware resource configuration information into the driver according to the injection function of the driver [Jiang 0016].
As per claim 3, Jiang and Lee teach the method for automatically configuring hardware resources of a driver according to claim 1, wherein loading the hardware resource configuration information into the driver comprises: configuring description information of one or more of the hardware resources in the hardware resource configuration information into one or more hardware resource structure bodies [Jiang 0012 and 004: (device package includes device configuration information)]; and loading the one or more hardware resource structure bodies into a structure body of the driver [Jiang 0014 and 0016: (invoking the device package to load the dynamic device table and the device configuration information, and update the driver with the device configuration information)].
As per claim 4, Jiang and Lee teach the method for automatically configuring hardware resources of a driver according to claim 3, wherein the structure body of the driver comprises a data structure body and a configure structure body [Jiang 0014: (device package (structure body) include a dynamic device table and executable file)], and the hardware resource structure bodies comprise a data substructure body and a configure substructure body [Lee 0042: pointers], loading the one or more hardware resource structure bodies into a structure body of the driver comprises: loading the one or more data substructure bodies and the configure substructure bodies into the data structure body and the configure structure body of the driver accordingly [Jiang 0016: (device driver updated with configuration information from a dynamic device table) and Lee 0049: (function pointers (substructure) are provided to DIA hierarchy)].
As per claim 6, Jiang and Lee teach the method for automatically configuring hardware resources of a driver according to claim 1, wherein the device model information comprises a device name, a hardware version number, and a hardware interface version number [Jiang 0013, and Lee 0028-0029, 0033-0034, and 0041].
Claim 11 is similar in scope to claim 1 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale. Jiang further teach a processor [0019]; and a memory storing a computer program [0019].
Claim 12 is similar in scope to claim 2 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 13 is similar in scope to claim 3 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 14 is similar in scope to claim 4 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 16 is similar in scope to claim 6 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 17 is similar in scope to claim 1 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 18 is similar in scope to claim 2 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 19 is similar in scope to claim 3 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 20 is similar in scope to claim 4 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 22 is similar in scope to claim 6 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 5, 15, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (hereinafter as Jiang) PGPUB 2006/0238791 in view of Lee PGPUB 2004/0030415, and further in view of Wu et al. (hereinafter as Wu) PGPUB 2023/0195472.
As per claim 5, Jiang and Lee teach the method for automatically configuring hardware resources of a driver according to claim 1.
Jiang and Lee do not teach after loading the hardware resource configuration information into the driver, further comprising: executing a driving process of the driver in a Zephyr system. Jiang and Lee teaches OS using drivers but do not mention the OS is Zephyr.
Wu teaches OS executing a driver on a computing device. Wu is thus similar to Jiang and Lee because they pertain to OS running drivers. Wu further teaches executing a driving process of the driver in a Zephyr system [0132: (RTOS may include Zephyr)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Wu’s teachings of the OS being Zephyr in Jiang and Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use Zephyr in Jiang and Lee because Zephyr provides an efficient OS that can run efficiently on low power and memory limited devices, thus expanding the applicability and teachings of Jiang and Lee to smaller simpler devices.
Claim 15 is similar in scope to claim 5 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 21 is similar in scope to claim 5 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is reminded that in amending in response to a rejection of claims, the patentable novelty must be clearly shown in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited and the objections made. Applicant must also show how the amendments avoid such references and objections. See 37 CFR §1.111(c).
Cooper (PGPUB 2003/0014561) teaches switching between drivers if different hardware device versions.
Douceur et al. (PGPUB 2013/0036431) teaches mapping identifiers to drivers, and changing behavior of driver.
Cesare et al. (USPAT 8,196,153) teaches a structure with a first field to store identifier of device and a second field to store identifier of driver that may be a pointer to a memory location of a device driver.
Callender (PGPUB 2006/0200817) teaches detecting a version level change and updates functionality by updating pointer tables that point to functions needed by the driver [0024].
Mallur et al. (PGPUB 2013/0139139) teaches updating a driver on a client device using a configuration file.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANNY CHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5134. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-7 EST.
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 5712703779. 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.
/DANNY CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175
Prosecution Insights