DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s amendment and arguments filed August 20, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1 and 5 have been amended.
Claims 2 and 7 are cancelled as previously indicated.
Claims 1, 3-6, and 8-9 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 of this title, 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NAKAMURA (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2014/0334313 A1) in view of Lu et al. (hereinafter Lu) (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2010/0265829 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 5, and 6, Nakamura teaches a management method and management device (network performance apparatus, 10A, figures 21 and 22), managing a packet circulating network comprising a master device (master station, figure 22) and a plurality of slave devices (slave stations, figure 22) connected to the master device, the management device comprising:
a memory (network information storing unit, figure 21) storing in advance a network configuration information (network-configuration information) which describes a designed network configuration created by a user (design data relation information) ([0174]; [0246]; [0272]; teaches storing network configuration information which comprises design connection relation information related to the network); and a processor (control unit, figure 21), coupled to the memory, wherein the processor is configured to implement:
an actual configuration information acquisition unit (21, figure 21), acquiring actual configuration information of the actual network from the master device ([0246]; [0272]; teaches acquiring the actual, real network connection relation information from the master station and network); a ring topology detection unit (21, figure 21), detecting a ring topology configured from the slave devices based on the actual configuration information ([0246]; [0272]; teaches acquiring the actual, real network relation information and determining the topology of the slave station and network, which may be a ring topology), and identifiably displaying the ring topology in an actual network configuration diagram displayed based on the actual configuration information and displaying a network configuration diagram based on the network configuration information and displaying a network configuration diagram based on the network configuration information side by side with the actual network configuration diagram (display unit, figure 21) ([0174]; [0246]; [0272]; teaches graphically displaying the design connection relation information and the actual, real network connection relation information in order to compare the information side by side to highlight differences).
However, Nakamura does not explicitly disclose wherein the actual configuration information comprises slave connection information of each of the slaves and each of the slave connection information comprises between-port connection information, and the ring topology detection unit traces connection relationship between an input port and output port in an order of data packets circulation from an output port of one of the slave devices located upstream and the output port of an other one of the slave devices located downstream and detects the ring topology based on the between-port connection information included in the slave connection information.
Nonetheless, in the same field of endeavor, Lu teaches and suggests wherein the actual configuration information comprises slave connection information (list of connection between nodes/SW/ports) of each of the slaves (transit node/SW) and each of the slave connection information comprises between-port connection information (port to port connections; figure 2), and the ring topology detection unit traces connection relationship between an input port (first ring port) and output port (second ring port) in an order of data packets (LLDP messages) circulation from an output port of one of the slave devices located upstream and the output port of an other one of the slave devices located downstream and detects the ring topology based on the between-port connection information included in the slave connection information ([0012]; “…determines whether a topology of the links discovered from an arbitrary one of the ports configured to participate in the domain form a conceptual ring. The topology of the discovered links forms a conceptual ring when each of the ports configured to participate in the domain are accounted for in the discovered links…”; [0013]; [0031]; [0040]; [0042]; teaches discovery the topology of the link in order to discover the ring topology based on the port to port connection information related to the links between the nodes/SW; figure 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate discovery the topology of the link in order to discover the ring topology based on the port to port connection information related to the links between the nodes/SW as taught by Lu with the method of detecting ring topology as disclosed by Nakamura for the purpose of discovering and managing the topology of the network in order to insure proper operation and performance of the network, as suggested by Lu.
Claims 3, 4, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NAKAMURA (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2014/0334313 A1) in view of Lu et al. (hereinafter Lu) (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2010/0265829 A1), and further in view of TANIGUCHI et al. (hereinafter Taniguchi) (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2021/0266229 A1).
Regarding claims 3 and 8, Nakamura, as modified by Lu, discloses determining the topology of the slave devices to be that of a ring topology, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the ring topology detection unit determines, based on slave information representing unique information per type of each of the slave devices, whether the ring topology is supported for each of the slave devices from which the ring topology is configured.
Nonetheless, in the same field of endeavor, Taniguchi teaches and suggests wherein the ring topology detection unit determines, based on slave information representing unique information per type of each of the slave devices, whether the ring topology is supported for each of the slave devices from which the ring topology is configured ([0149]; [0240]; teaches information about the slave node including node type and ring ID regarding the ring topology).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate information about the slave node including node type and ring ID regarding the ring topology as taught by Taniguchi with the method of detecting ring topology as disclosed by Nakamura, as modified by Lu, for the purpose of monitoring and managing topology, as suggested by Taniguchi.
Regarding claims 4 and 9, Nakamura, as modified by Lu, discloses determining the topology of the slave devices to be that of a ring topology, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the ring topology detection unit identifiably displays the slave device not supporting the ring topology in the actual network configuration diagram displayed based on the actual configuration information.
Nonetheless, in the same field of endeavor, Taniguchi teaches and suggests wherein the ring topology detection unit identifiably displays the slave device not supporting the ring topology in the actual network configuration diagram displayed based on the actual configuration information ([0068]; [0149]; [0240]; teaches displaying information about the slave node including ring ID regarding the support ring topology on a screen).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate displaying information about the slave node including node type and ring ID regarding the ring topology on a screen as taught by Taniguchi with the method of detecting ring topology as disclosed by Nakamura, as modified by Lu, for the purpose of monitoring and managing topology, as suggested by Taniguchi.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 3-6, 8, and 9 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection as necessitated by Applicant’s amendment.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUK JIN KANG whose telephone number is (571) 270-1771. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached on (571) 272-3144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/Suk Jin Kang/
Examiner, Art Unit 2477
November 6, 2025
/CHIRAG G SHAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2477