UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`'nia 22313-1450
`Alexandria, Vi
`www.uspto.go
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`F ING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`CONF <MATION NO.
`
`11/980,687
`
`10/31/2007
`
`David A. Farber
`
`2618-0017
`
`6761
`
`42624
`
`7590
`
`06/15/2009
`
`DAVIDSON BERQUIST JACKSON & GOWDEY LLP
`4300 WILSON BLVD., 7TH FLOOR
`ARLINGTON, VA 22203
`
`EXAMINER
`
`LEMMA, SAMSON B
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2432
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`06/ 15/2009
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 626 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 626 of 841
`
`

`
`Application No.
`
`App|icant(s)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`11/980,687
`
`Examine,
`
`FARBER ET AL.
`
`A,, Unit
`
`2432 —
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1)IXI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 31 October 2007.
`
`2a)I:I This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)IXI This action is non-final.
`
`3)I:I Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`4)IXI C|aim(s) 1 is/are pending in the application.
`
`4a) Of the above c|aim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`5)I:I C|aim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`6)IXI C|aim(s) 1 is/are rejected.
`
`7)IXI C|aim(s) Q is/are objected to.
`
`8)I:I C|aim(s) j are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`Application Papers
`
`9)I:I The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`10)IZ The drawing(s) filed on 31 October 2007 is/are: a)IXI accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`11)I:I The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)I:I Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`
`a)I:I All
`
`b)I:I Some * c)I:I None of:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3.I:I Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attach ment(s)
`
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`2) D Notice of Draftsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)
`3) IXI Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`4) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper N0(S)/IVI3” Data E
`5) I:I Noiice Oi informal Paieiii Appiicaiion
`6) D Other:
`.
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`ier No./Mail Date 02252009
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 627 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 627 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/980,687
`
`Page 2
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`DETAILED A CTION
`
`1.
`
`This is in reply to application filed on October 31, 2007. Claims 1-24
`
`have been submitted /examined of which claims 1, 20,21 and 24 are
`
`independent.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`2.
`
`The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/ 26/07 and
`
`10/03/08 have been considered. The submission is in compliance with
`
`the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Form PTO—1449 is signed and attached
`
`hereto.
`
`Oath/Declaration
`
`3.
`
`The oath filed on 10/31/07 complies with all the requirements set forth
`
`in MPEP 602 and therefore is accepted.
`
`Drawings
`
`4.
`
`The drawings filed on October 31, 2007 are accepted.
`
`Specification
`
`5.
`
`The specification filed on October 31, 2007 is accepted.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`6.
`
`Independent claim 20 is objected to because of the following
`
`informalities: On claim 20, lines 3, the limitation, “by” before the
`
`limitation “in response to ...” makes the claim grammatically incorrect.
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 628 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 628 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/980,687
`
`Page 3
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`The limitation “by" should either be deleted or appropriate correction is
`
`required.
`
`Claim Rejections — 35 USC § 103
`
`7.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) Which forms the
`
`basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though 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.
`
`8.
`
`Qlaimg 1-lg and 1§-g§ are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Blickenstaff et al (hereinafter referred to as
`
`Blickenstaff), U.S. Patent No. 5,537,585 (filed on Feb 25, 1994) in view
`
`of Yukio Orita (hereinafter referred to as Orita) U.S. Patent No. 5,
`
`163,147 (Date of Patent: Nov 10,1992)
`
`9.
`
`As get independent claim 1, Blickenstaff discloses a method, in a
`
`system which includes a network of computers [See at least column 4,
`
`lines 23-28 and figure “1 / local area network”, ref. Num “ 21, 22 and 42”
`
`and column 1, lines 6-8, “this invention relates to data communication
`
`networks, such as local area networks, that function to interconnect a
`
`plurality of data processors”] (Note: as it is disclosed on column 4, lines 26-
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 629 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 629 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 4
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`28, “processors, shown on figure 1, are either personal computers, work
`
`stations or mini—computers”) the method comprising:
`
`0
`
`(a) obtaining a name for a data item, the name being included
`
`in a request for the data item [Figure 8, ref. Num “801—803” and column
`
`13, lines 34-46,], ( “4. File management scheme, including access methods.
`
`For example, DOS data files are named with a 1-8 byte name and a 0-3
`
`byte extent, which are delimited by a ”. ” (nnnnnnnn.xxx). The directory
`
`architecture is illustrated in FIG. 13 and takes the form of a hierarchical
`
`tree of directory names. The root is typically a volume, from which a
`
`number of directories branch. Each directory includes other directories
`
`and/ or data files. A [ull data [ile name is represented by concatenating all
`
`the directory tree structure components from the root to the particular data
`
`file, with components being delimited by ” ”. An example of such a data file
`
`name using this convention is ” vol\dir1\ dir3\ filename.ext”.) and
`
`Blickenstaff further discloses,
`
`based on said name, determine the location of the file and
`
`providing the requesting computer obtain the requested file from its
`
`own storage device or from the different server, distinct from the
`
`requesting computer. [See figure 8, and Column 5, lines 38-57]
`
`Blickenstaff does not explicitly disclose
`
`0
`
`the name being based at least in part on the data which
`
`comprise the contents of the data item; and (b) determining, based
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 630 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 630 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 5
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`at least in part on said name, whether or not access to the data item
`
`is authorized.
`
`However, in the same field of endeavor Orita at least on its abstract
`
`discloses the following which meets the above limitation.
`
`“When a specified file access is requested after the execution of the
`
`user program, whether execution of the file access is permitted or
`
`not is determined according to access protection information. The
`
`access protection information is information having access types and Q
`
`contents defined by the environment profile information.”
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art,
`
`at the time the invention was made, to combine the feature such as the
`
`name being based at least in part on the data which comprise the
`
`contents of the data item; and determining, based at least in part on
`
`said name, whether or not access to the data item is authorized as
`
`per teachings of Orita into the method of accessing of the file using the
`
`file name as taught by Blickenstaff in order provide a more secure
`
`access control and accurately/ expeditiously retrieve requested file / s.
`
`10.
`
`As pg}: indgpgndgnt glaim 29, Bligkgnstaff discloses a method
`
`comprising: controlling distribution of licensed content (column 5,
`
`lines 28-35, see “migration offiles”) from a first computer [Figure 1, ref.
`
`41 and 43 or storage server processor 51] to a requesting computer
`
`[Figure 1, ref. Num “21 ” and ”22’7 in response to a request for the
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 631 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 631 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 6
`
`Art UIli':: 2432
`
`content from said requesting computer, [See figure 8, and Column 5,
`
`lines 38-57]
`
`the request including at least a name of the data file, [Figure 8,
`
`ref. Num “801-803” and column 13, lines 34-46,], ( “4. File management
`
`scheme, including access methods. For example, DOS data files are named
`
`with a 1-8 byte name and a 0-3 byte extent, which are delimited by a ”. ”
`
`(nnnnnnnn.xxx). The directory architecture is illustrated in FIG. 13 and
`
`takes the form of a hierarchical tree of directory names. The root is
`
`typically a volume, from which a number of directories branch. Each
`
`directory includes other directories and/ or data files. A ull data ile name
`
`is represented by concatenating all the directory tree structure components
`
`from the root to the particular data file, with components being delimited
`
`by ” ”. An example of such a data file name using this convention is ”
`
`vol\dir1\ dir3\ filename.ext”.)
`
`Blickenstaff further discloses,
`
`based on said name, determine the location of the file and
`
`providing the requesting computer obtain the requested file from its
`
`own storage device or from the different server, distinct from the
`
`requesting computer. [See figure 8, and Column 5, lines 38-57]
`
`Blickenstaff does not explicitly disclose the limitation recited as,
`
`the name having been determined using at least a function of the data
`
`comprising the data item, permitting the content to be provided to the
`
`requesting computer if the content is authorized or licensed.
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 632 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 632 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 7
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`However, in the same field of endeavor Orita at least on its abstract
`
`discloses the following which meets the above limitation.
`
`“When a specified file access is requested after the execution of the
`
`user program, whether execution of the file access is permitted or
`
`not is determined according to access protection information. The
`
`access protection information is information having access types and %
`
`contents defined by the environment profile information.”
`
`It Would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art,
`
`at the time the invention Was made, to combine the feature such as the
`
`name having been determined using at least a function of the data
`
`comprising the data item, permitting the content to be provided to the
`
`requesting computer if the content is authorized or licensed as per
`
`teachings of Orita into the method of accessing of the file using the file
`
`name as taught by Blickenstaff in order provide a more secure access
`
`control and accurately/ expeditiously retrieve requested file / s.
`
`ll.
`
`_ discloses a method
`
`comprising:
`
`(a) obtaining a list of names, one for each of a plurality of data
`
`items, wherein, for each of the data items [Figure 8, ref. Num “801—
`
`803” and column 13, lines 34-46,], ( “4. File management scheme,
`
`including access methods. For example, DOS data files are named with a
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 633 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 633 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 8
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`1-8 byte name and a 0-3 byte extent, which are delimited by a ”. ”
`
`(nnnnnnnn.xxx). The directory architecture is illustrated in FIG. 13 and
`
`takes the form of a hierarchical tree of directory names. The root is
`
`typically a volume, from which a number of directories branch. Each
`
`directory includes other directories and/ or data files. A ull data ile name
`
`is represented by concatenating all the directory tree structure components
`
`from the root to the particular data file, with components being delimited
`
`by ” ”. An example of such a data file name using this convention is ”
`
`vol\dir1\ dir3\ filename.ext”.) ,
`
`(b) receiving, from a requestor, an identifier for a requested
`
`data item [Figure 8, ref. Num “801—803” and column 13, lines 34-46,],
`
`Blickenstaff further discloses,
`
`based on said name, determine the location of the file and
`
`providing the requesting computer obtain the requested file from its
`
`own storage device or from the different server, distinct from the
`
`requesting computer. [See figure 8, and Column 5, lines 38-57]
`
`Blickenstaff does not explicitly disclose the limitation recited as,
`
`the corresponding name for that data item was determined as
`
`a function of the contents of the data item; said identifier having
`
`been determined based at least in part on the contents of the
`
`requested data item; (c) determining, based at least in part on said
`
`identifier for said requested data item, and using said list of names,
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 634 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 634 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/980,687
`
`Page 9
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`whether the requestor may access the requested data item; and (d)
`
`based on said determining, if it is determined that requestor may
`
`not access the requested data item, denying access to the requested
`
`data item.
`
`However, in the same field of endeavor Orita at least on its abstract
`
`discloses the following which meets the above limitation.
`
`“When a specified file access is requested after the execution of the
`
`user program, whether execution of the file access is permitted or
`
`not is determined according to access protection information. The
`
`access protection information is information having access types and @
`
`contents defined by the environment profile information.”
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art,
`
`at the time the invention was made, to combine the feature such as the
`
`name having been determined using at least a function of the data
`
`comprising the data item, permitting or denying the content to be
`
`provided to the requesting computer as per teachings of Orita into the
`
`method of accessing of the file using the file name as taught by
`
`Blickenstaff in order provide a more secure access control and
`
`accurately / expeditiously retrieve requested file / s.
`
`12. As per independent claim 24, limitations recited in independent claim
`
`24 is similar / equivalent to that of the limitations recited in independent
`
`claim 21, thus the claim is rejected for the same reasons /rationale as
`
`that of independent claim 21.
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 635 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 635 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 10
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`13. As per dependent claim 2, the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita
`
`discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore Orita
`
`discloses the method further comprising: (c) based at least in part
`
`on said determining, denying access to the data item when it is
`
`determined that access to the data item is not authorized. [See
`
`abstract] (On abstract the following has been disclosed. “When a specified
`
`file access is requested after the execution of the user program, whether
`
`execution of the file access is permitted or not is determined according to
`
`access protection information. The access protection information is
`
`information having access types and file contents defined by the
`
`environment profile information.”
`
`14. As per dependent claim 3, the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita
`
`discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore Orita
`
`discloses the method wherein the request is received from a
`
`particular requestor, and wherein said step (b) of determining
`
`comprises: determining whether or not the particular requestor is
`
`authorized. [See abstract] (On abstract the following has been disclosed.
`
`“When a specified file access is requested after the execution of the user
`
`program, whether execution of the file access is permitted or not is
`
`determined according to access protection information. The access
`
`protection information is information having access types and file contents
`
`defined by the environment profile information.”
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 636 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 636 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 11
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`15. As per dependent claim 4, the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita
`
`discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore Orita
`
`discloses the method further comprising: if it is determined that the
`
`particular requestor is not authorized, denying the particular
`
`requestor's request for the data item. [See abstract] (On abstract the
`
`following has been disclosed. “When a specified file access is requested
`
`after the execution of the user program, whether execution of the file
`
`access is permitted or not is determined according to access protection
`
`information. The access protection information is information having access
`
`types and file contents defined by the environment profile information.”
`
`16.
`
`As per dependent claim 5, the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita
`
`discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore Orita
`
`discloses the method wherein said step (b) of determining whether
`
`or not the data item is authorized comprises determining whether
`
`or not the name is contained in a database comprising a plurality of
`
`identifiers. [See figure 1 and abstract, See also Blickenstaff, figure 1]
`
`17.
`
`As per dependent claim 6, the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita
`
`discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore Orita
`
`discloses the method wherein the name for the data item is based
`
`on a function of the data which comprise the contents of the data
`
`file, and wherein the plurality of identifiers in the database are
`
`identifiers of licensed content items, and wherein the identifier of
`
`each licensed content item is based at least in part on the function
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 637 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 637 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit:
`
`2432
`
`of the data comprising the licensed content item. [See figure 1 and
`
`abstract, See also Blickenstaff, figure 1]
`
`18.
`
`As per dependent claim 7 , the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita
`
`discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Blickenstaff discloses the method further comprising: (d) collecting
`
`information regarding the data item. [See figure 1 and figure 8]
`
`19.
`
`As per dependent claim 8, the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita
`
`discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Blickenstaff discloses the method, wherein the information
`
`collected includes at least one of: (a) information about which data
`
`items have been stored on a computer; (b) information about the
`
`content of the data item, (c) information about the owner of the
`
`data item, (d) information about the type of data item, (e)
`
`information about the contextual name of the data item, (f)
`
`information about whether the data item was copied; (g) the name of
`
`the data item; (h) information about an identity of the requestor; (i)
`
`a timestamp; (j) information about whether the data item was
`
`created; and (k) information about whether the data item was read.
`
`[See figure 1 and figure 8]
`
`20.
`
`As per dependent claim 9, the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita
`
`discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Blickenstaff discloses the method, wherein at least some of the
`
`information collected is maintained for accounting or billing
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 638 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 638 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`Page
`
`13
`
`purposes. (It is implicit that such secondary storage system provided, as
`
`shown on figure 1, ref. Num “51 ” and “52”, which maintains/ stores a
`
`collection offiles to the users as shown on figure 1, ref. Num “21 ” and
`
`“22”, could be used by the owner of the storage server/ s shown on figure
`
`1, in order to provide storage services for the users by charging them for
`
`the provided storage services)
`
`21.
`
`As per dependent claim 10, the combination of Blickenstaff and
`
`Orita discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Blickenstaff discloses the method, further comprising: (d) tracking
`
`identities of data items requested. [See at least figure 8, ref. Num “801—
`
`8037
`
`22.
`
`As per dependent claims 13 and 22, the combination of Blickenstaff
`
`and Orita discloses the method as applied to claims above.
`
`Furthermore Blickenstaff discloses the method, wherein the name is
`
`a True Name. [Figure 8, ref Num “801—803” and column 13, lines 34-46,]
`
`23.
`
`As per dependent claim 14, the combination of Blickenstaff and
`
`Orita discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Blickenstaff discloses the method, wherein a data item may
`
`comprise a file, a portion of a file, a page in memory, a digital
`
`message, a digital image, a video signal or an audio signal. [Figure 1,
`
`ref Num “801—803”]
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 639 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 639 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 14
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`24.
`
`As per dependent claims 15 and 23, the combination of Blickenstaff
`
`and Orita discloses the method as applied to claims above.
`
`Furthermore Blickenstaff discloses the method, wherein at least
`
`some computers make up part of a peer-to-peer network of
`
`computers. (See at least column 4, lines 23-28 and figure “1 / local area
`
`network”, ref. Num “ 21, 22 and 42” and column 1, lines 6-8, “this
`
`invention relates to data communication networks, such as local area
`
`networks, that function to interconnect a plurality of data processors”]
`
`(Note: as it is disclosed on column 4, lines 26-28, “processors, shown on
`
`figure 1, are either personal computers, work stations or mini—computers”)
`
`25. As per dependent claim 16, the combination of Blickenstaff and
`
`Orita discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Orita discloses the method, further comprising: (c) authorizing
`
`access to the data item when it is determined that the data item is
`
`authorized. [See abstract] (On abstract the following has been disclosed.
`
`“When a specified file access is requested after the execution of the user
`
`program, whether execution of the file access is permitted or not is
`
`determined according to access protection information. The access
`
`protection information is information having access types and file contents
`
`defined by the environment profile information.”
`
`26. As per dependent claim 17 , the combination of Blickenstaff and
`
`Orita discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Blickenstaff discloses the method, wherein the authorized access
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 640 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 640 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 15
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`permits copying of the data item from at least one of the plurality of
`
`computers. [Figure 8, ref. Num “809” and Column 5, lines 38-57]
`
`27. As per dependent claim 18, limitations recited in dependent claim 18 is
`
`similar/ equivalent to that of the limitations recited in independent claim
`
`20, thus the claim is rejected for the same reasons / rationale as that of
`
`independent claim 20.
`
`28.
`
`As per dependent claim 19, the combination of Blickenstaff and
`
`Orita discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Orita discloses the method, if it is determined that said data item is
`
`authorized, access to the data item is authorized [See abstract] from
`
`more than one of the plurality of computers[See Blickenstaff, figure 1
`
`and figure 8]
`
`29.
`
`As per dependent claim 25, the combination of Blickenstaff and
`
`Orita discloses the method as applied to claims above. Furthermore
`
`Blickenstaff discloses the method, further comprising: in response
`
`to said request: (iv) allowing the data file to be delivered to the
`
`requesting computer if the data file is authorized. [See figure 8, and
`
`Column 5, lines 38-5 7,see also Orita’s abstract how the authorization is
`
`determined, such as based on the content of the file]
`
`30.
`
`Dependent glaims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Blickenstaff et al (hereinafter referred to as
`
`Blickenstaff), U.S. Patent No. 5,537,585 (filed on Feb 25, 1994) in View
`
`of Yukio Orita (hereinafter referred to as Orita) U.S. Patent No. 5,
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 641 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 641 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/980,687
`
`Page 16
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`163,147 (Date of Patent: Nov 10, 1992) further in View of Gramlich et a1
`
`(hereinafter referred to as Gramlich), U.S. Patent No. 5,202,982 (date of
`
`Patent: 04/ 13/ 1993) (submitted/cited/listed with/in IDS)
`
`31.
`
`As. get degendent claims 11 and 12, Blickenstaff discloses a method,
`
`in a system which includes a network of computers [See at least
`
`column 4, lines 23-28 and figure “1 / local area network”, ref. Num “ 21, 22
`
`and 42” and column 1, lines 6-8, “this invention relates to data
`
`communication networks, such as local area networks, that function to
`
`interconnect a plurality of data processors”] (Note: as it is disclosed on
`
`column 4, lines 26-28, “processors, shown on figure 1, are either personal
`
`computers, work stations or mini-computers”) the method comprising:
`
`0
`
`(a) obtaining a name for a data item, the name being included
`
`in a request for the data item [Figure 8, ref. Num “801-803” and column
`
`13, lines 34-46,], ( “4. File management scheme, including access methods.
`
`For example, DOS data files are named with a 1-8 byte name and a 0-3
`
`byte extent, which are delimited by a ”. ” (nnnnnnnn.xxx). The directory
`
`architecture is illustrated in FIG. 13 and takes the form of a hierarchical
`
`tree of directory names. The root is typically a volume, from which a
`
`number of directories branch. Each directory includes other directories
`
`and/ or data files. A full data file name is represented by concatenating all
`
`the directory tree structure components from the root to the particular data
`
`file, with components being delimited by ” ”. An example of such a data file
`
`name using this convention is ” vol\dir1\ dir3\ filename.ext”.) and
`
`Blickenstaff further discloses,
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 642 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 642 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 17
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`based on said name, determine the location of the file and
`
`providing the requesting computer obtain the requested file from its
`
`own storage device or from the different server, distinct from the
`
`requesting computer. [See figure 8, and Column 5, lines 38-57]
`
`Blickenstaff does not explicitly disclose
`
`0
`
`the name being based at least in part on the data which
`
`comprise the contents of the data item; and (b) determining, based
`
`at least in part on said name, whether or not access to the data item
`
`is authorized.
`
`However, in the same field of endeavor Orita at least on its abstract
`
`discloses the following which meets the above limitation.
`
`“When a specified file access is requested after the execution of the
`
`user program, whether execution of the file access is permitted or
`
`not is determined according to access protection information. The
`
`access protection information is information having access types and @
`
`contents defined by the environment profile information.”
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art,
`
`at the time the invention was made, to combine the feature such as the
`
`name being based at least in part on the data which comprise the
`
`contents of the data item; and determining, based at least in part on
`
`said name, whether or not access to the data item is authorized as
`
`per teachings of Orita into the method of accessing of the file using the
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 643 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 643 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 18
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`file name as taught by Blickenstaff in order provide a more secure
`
`access control and accurately/ expeditiously retrieve requested file / s.
`
`The combination of Blickenstaff and Orita does not explicitly
`
`discloses the limitation recited as,
`
`wherein the name is based, at least in part, on a function of the data
`
`which comprise the contents of the data item, and wherein the function
`
`is a message digest function or a hash function and wherein the function
`
`is selected from the functions: MD4, MD5, and SHA.
`
`However, in the same field of endeavor Gramlich at least on
`
`its abstract and column 2, lines 52-55, discloses the following
`
`which meets the above limitation.
`
`“In the method and apparatus of the present invention a
`
`file to be added to the database is given a unique name that is
`
`dependent upon the contents of the file such that, when the contents
`
`of the source file changes, the name of the database component file to
`
`be added to the database also changes. Conversely, if two files of the
`
`same name have the same information contained therein, the same
`
`file name will be generated and the duplication of information in the
`
`database is prevented by providing a simple test that checks for the
`
`existence of the name of the database file before the generation and
`
`addition of the new file to the database. If the file name exists in the
`
`database, information is already contained in the database and the
`
`file is not generated and added to the database information.
`
`Preferably the name of the file is generated by computing a hash
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 644 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 644 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number:
`
`ll/980,687
`
`Page 19
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`
`value from the contents of the file concatenating the hash value
`
`to the name of the source file.”
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art,
`
`at the time the invention was made, to add the feature such as the name
`
`is based, at least in part, on a function of the data which comprise the
`
`contents of the data item, and wherein the function is a message digest
`
`function or a hash function as per teachings of Gramlich into the
`
`method as taught by the combination of Blickenstaff and Orita, in
`
`order to provide efficient system that saves resources by avoiding
`
`duplication of storage of files having the same content. [See
`
`Gramlich column 2, lines 36-51]
`
`Conclusion
`
`32. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent
`
`to applicants disclosure.
`
`a.
`
`US Patent No. 5,742,807, to Masinter discloses Systems and
`
`methods for managing a plurality of electronically stored documents in
`
`an open document repository employ a one—Way hash function to
`
`compute a hash for the stored documents as an indexing link. A
`
`document management index maps an attribute of an original document
`
`stored in the repository to the hash and the document. A hash—to—
`
`location index maps the hash to an address location of the document in
`
`a file system of the repository. The attribute points to the hash which
`
`then points to the location for linking the attribute to the location. [See at
`
`lease the abstract]
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 645 of 841
`
`GOOG-1002-Page 645 of 841
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/980,687
`
`Page 20
`
`Art UI1i':: 2432
`