Difference between revisions of "Office Action Sample 1- 14801964"
Venkatram.a (Talk | contribs) (→Claim vs Reference chart) |
Venkatram.a (Talk | contribs) (→Claim vs Reference chart) |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
The following Claim vs Reference chart lists out claim and reference wise rejection. This chart provides birds eye-view of the claims in the Application and the rejections given by Examiner and the corresponding references cited against the claims. | The following Claim vs Reference chart lists out claim and reference wise rejection. This chart provides birds eye-view of the claims in the Application and the rejections given by Examiner and the corresponding references cited against the claims. | ||
| − | * '''[ | + | * '''[http://dolcera.com/upload/files/ClaimVsReferenceChart964.xlsx Claim Vs Reference Chart_14801964]]''' |
[[File:Screen Shot 2017-03-06 at 5.46.42 pm.png|framed|center|Claim Vs Reference chart]] | [[File:Screen Shot 2017-03-06 at 5.46.42 pm.png|framed|center|Claim Vs Reference chart]] | ||
Revision as of 07:01, 7 March 2017
Contents
Application-14/801,964
The following is the Application-14/801,964 (filed July 17, 2015) for which Non-final Office action has been issued. The invention relates generally to a method for software discovery in an environment with heterogeneous machine groups.
Title: Software Discovery in an Environment with Heterogeneous Machine Groups
Summary/Novelty of the invention:A mechanism is provided for software discovery in an environment with heterogeneous machine groups may be provided. A group comprising computing systems that have similar software program installations is defined. A first scan procedure is performed by scanning each computing system of the group using a first software signature catalogue to identify installed programs. Software signatures of identified installed programs are added to a base installation software catalogue. A second scan procedure is performed by scanning the group of computing systems using the base installation software catalogue to identify installed software programs.
Non-final Office Action
The following is the Non-final Office action issued by the Examiner- Stephen David Berman (Art Unit 2192). The Office Action was issued on March 25, 2016. The Office Action has claims objections, 112(b), 101 and 103 rejection.
References cited in rejection
The below listed files are the three cited references in the Non-final Office Action 14/801,964.
- Primary Reference_Vidal-20120054733
- Secondary Reference1_Perrone-7506038
- Secondary Reference2_Back-20070220507
PHASE 1:
Claim vs Reference chart
The following Claim vs Reference chart lists out claim and reference wise rejection. This chart provides birds eye-view of the claims in the Application and the rejections given by Examiner and the corresponding references cited against the claims.
Prosecution Data Sheet
The below Prosecution Data Sheet (PDS) is a brief of the proposed amendment/argument.
- Provides the extension dates after the statutory period and the corresponding fees applicable for each extension
- Provides reference validation check (whether the reference cited by examiner is valid)
- Provides proposed response to each Rejection/Objection in the Application.
PHASE 2:
Complete Office Action Response
The following Office action response is the complete draft which contains all the response to obviate/rebut the rejection used by the Examiner against the Application.
