Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
2. Applicant elects Group II (claims 7-16). This election is made without traverse and without prejudice to the claims of the non-elected groups. Claims 1-6 and 17-20 have been withdrawn from consideration.
3. This office action is in response to the claims filed 04/29/2026.
4. Claim 7 is independent claim.
5. The office action is made Non-Final.
Information Disclosure Statement
6. The information disclosure statement (IDSs) submitted on 11/20/2025 was considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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.
8. Claims 7-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
9. Regarding claim 7, the claim cites undefined acronyms (GPT), the claim fails to point out and distinctly claim the invention, as it leaves the true scope of the term ambiguous. The acronyms (GPT) could mean “GUID Partition Table (GPT)” or “Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT)”.
Dependent claims 8-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to their dependence on independent claim 7, carrying the same deficiencies.
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 10, 11, 14 and 15 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Fujii teaches limitations as per claim 7, but fail to teach what claims 10, 11, 14 and 15 have.
There is no prior art of record, whether singly or in combination, teach or suggest the limitations of claims 10, 11, 14 and 15.
Examiner Note
12. The Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the Applicant(s). 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
13. 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.
14. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) The claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention;
15. Claims 7-9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Fujii (US 20230069169 A1) hereinafter as Fujii.
16. Regarding claim 1, Fujii teaches A GPT recovery method, comprising:
checking, during registering of a GPT, whether the GPT and a backup GPT located in a backup partition are complete (Fig 2, [0028], “A first GUID Partition Table (GPT) area 202 includes second management information (GPT). A second GPT area 207 (a backup GPT) that stores third management information is a backup area for the first GPT area 202 that stores the second management information.”, Fig 4, steps S405 and S411, [0036-0037], “In S401, the CPU 101 loads the MBR 201 from the HDD 103. Upon completion of loading (during registering of a GPT), the CPU 101 verifies whether or not the MBR 201 is valid in S402… Upon completion of loading, the CPU 101 verifies whether or not the second management information included in the first GPT area 202 is valid in S405 (whether the GPT located in a backup partition is complete)”, [0040], “Upon completion of loading, the CPU 101 verifies whether or not the third management information included in the second GPT area 207 is valid ((whether the backup GPT located in a backup partition is complete)), in S411. Next, in S412, the CPU 101 advances the processing to S413 when the third management information of the second GPT area 207 is determined to be valid by the verification processing, or to S414 when the third management information is determined to be invalid.”), wherein the backup partition is located outside a user partition in a storage medium (Fig 1, [0026], “second GPT (backup GPT) is located outside the Master Boot Record (MBR) 201 (a user partition in a storage medium). The MBR 201 (a user partition in a storage medium) is the head sector that is present outside a partition and includes a total number of sectors information 2011 of the LBA used.”, Fig 2, [0028]); and
recovering the GPT through the backup GPT located in the backup partition if the GPT is damaged and the backup GPT located in the backup partition is complete (Fig 2, [0028], “When an abnormality is detected in the second management information due to damage or tampering of the first GPT area 202, the first GPT area 202 is restored using the third management information of the second GPT area 207.”, Fig 4, step S413, [0040], “Upon completion of loading, the CPU 101 verifies whether or not the third management information included in the second GPT area 207 is valid (the backup GPT located in a backup partition is complete), in S411. Next, in S412, the CPU 101 advances the processing to S413 when the third management information of the second GPT area 207 is determined to be valid by the verification processing, or to S414 when the third management information is determined to be invalid. In S413, the CPU 101 executes the restoration processing for restoring the second management information of the first GPT area 202 (the GPT), which is determined to be invalid (GPT is damaged), by using the third management information of the second GPT area 207 (the backup GPT), and advances the processing to S407. In the restoration processing, processing of overwriting the content of the first GPT area 202 (the GPT) with the content of the second GPT area 207 (the backup GPT) is executed.”).
17. Regarding claim 8, Fujii teaches the invention as claimed in claim 7 above and further teaches wherein the backup partition is located in a reserved space between user partitions of the storage medium or in a system partition (Fig 2, [0028], “The information included in the second GPT area 207 is substantially identical to the information included in the first GPT area 202, but differs in that the information included in the second GPT area 207 includes self-location information and backup location information. When an abnormality is detected in the second management information due to damage or tampering of the first GPT area 202, the first GPT area 202 is restored using the third management information of the second GPT area 207.”).
18. Regarding claim 9, Fujii teaches the invention as claimed in claim 7 above and further teaches wherein a variable pointing to an address of the backup partition is stored in an address space in the storage medium (Fig 2, [0025]); and the checking whether a backup GPT is complete comprises:
obtaining, from the address space, the variable pointing to the address of the backup partition (Fig 2, [0028], “the location of the second GPT area 207 (backup GPT partition) is identified using the total number of sectors information 2011.”, Fig 4, step S409, [0039-0040], “in S409, that is, when the first GPT area 202 is determined to be invalid in S406, the CPU 101 acquires the total number of sectors information 2011 in use from the MBR 201. The second GPT area 207 is located in the last sector of the LBAs in use, and the sector number thereof is a numerical value identical to the total number of sectors information 2011.”);
checking whether the variable pointing to the address of the backup partition is complete (Fig 3, [0039-0040], “Upon completion of loading, the CPU 101 verifies whether or not the third management information included in the second GPT area 207 (the backup partition) is valid”);
obtaining address information of the backup partition through the variable pointing to the address of the backup partition if the variable pointing to the address of the backup partition is complete (Fig 4, step S409);
obtaining the backup GPT from the backup partition based on the address information of the backup partition (Fig 4, step S410 Load GPT#2 (backup GPT)); and
checking whether the backup GPT obtained from the backup partition is complete (Fig 4, steps S411 to S413).
19. Regarding claim 13, Fujii teaches the invention as claimed in claim 7 above and further teaches wherein if the GPT is complete and the backup GPT located in the backup partition is damaged, the method further comprises: recovering the backup GPT located in the backup partition through the GPT (Fig 2, [0028], “When an abnormality is detected in the second management information due to damage or tampering of the first GPT area 202, the first GPT area 202 is restored using the third management information of the second GPT area 207.”, Fig 4, step S413, [0040], “Upon completion of loading, the CPU 101 verifies whether or not the third management information included in the second GPT area 207 is valid (the backup GPT located in a backup partition is complete), in S411. Next, in S412, the CPU 101 advances the processing to S413 when the third management information of the second GPT area 207 is determined to be valid by the verification processing, or to S414 when the third management information is determined to be invalid. In S413, the CPU 101 executes the restoration processing for restoring the second management information of the first GPT area 202 (the GPT), which is determined to be invalid (GPT is damaged), by using the third management information of the second GPT area 207 (the backup GPT), and advances the processing to S407. In the restoration processing, processing of overwriting the content of the first GPT area 202 (the GPT) with the content of the second GPT area 207 (the backup GPT) is executed.”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
20. 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.
21. 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) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
22. Claims 12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Fujii (US 20230069169 A1) hereinafter as Fujii in view of Cao (CN 114816847 A) hereinafter as Cao.
23. Regarding claims 12 and 16, Fujii teaches the invention as claimed in claim 7 above, Fujii did not specifically teach wherein the user partition in the storage medium for storing the backup GPT by default is last 34 storage blocks of the storage medium.
However, Cao teaches wherein the user partition in the storage medium for storing the backup GPT by default is last 34 storage blocks of the storage medium (Fig 3, Page 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the concept of teachings suggested in Cao’s system into Fujii’s and by incorporating Cao into Fujii because both systems are related to data recovery would provide a data recovery method and device overcoming the drawbacks of other schemes.
CONCLUSION
24. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant s disclosure.
Pandey et al (US 8095753 B1)
Yamashila (US 20230063956 A1)
Nagahara (US 20220308789 A1)
SURYANARAYANA et al (US 20210026965 A1)
Jang et al (US 20040255106 A1)
Meng et al (US 8006125 B1)
Akamatsu (US 20210055877 A1)
Liu et al (US 20120272095 A1)
Rothman et al (US 20040255106 A1)
Singh et al (US 12222911 B1)
Jang (KR 20140039611 A)
DELYUKIN (RU 2830489 C1)
Masagome (JP 2015005009 A)
He (CN 114816542 A)
Huang (CN 114443353 A)
Hou (CN 103189840 A)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HICHAM SKHOUN whose telephone number is (571)272-9466. The examiner can normally be reached Normal schedule: Mon-Fri 10am-6:30pm.
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, Amy Ng can be reached at 5712701698. 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.
/HICHAM SKHOUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2164
Prosecution Insights