DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 10/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 12, and 29 under the combination of prior arts have been fully considered and the amendments overcome the 112 rejection. However, the new amendments necessitated new grounds of rejection.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-10, 12, 14-19 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang “An Optimized BBR for Multipath Real Time Video Streaming”, further in view of Contavalli (US pg. no. 20180212885).
Regarding claim 1. Zhang discloses a system for managing data packet delivery flow where one or more data packets are being communicated across a set of multi-path network links, the system comprising:
a processor (figure 1 discloses congestion control) configured to: monitor an aggregated throughput (page 4, col.1, par. 1 discloses total available throughput) being provided through the set of multi-path network links (fig. 1 discloses data communicated across multiple links) operating together (page 4, col.1, par. 1 discloses if the packets incoming rate of a path exceeds the pacing rate, the length of local buffer would increase and the latency of buffered packet delivered to the receiver would increase too. The rate control module adjusts bitrate of the video encoder according to the available bandwidth of all its sub-paths to make sure the video data generating rate to match the total available throughput (aggregated throughput). The processor monitoring the pacing rate and total available throughput corresponds to processor);
conduct packet spacing operations ... such that the one or more data packets appear to be communicated at a required pace (page 4, col.1, par. 1 discloses the packets incoming rate of a path exceeds the pacing rate… The rate control module adjusts bitrate (conducting packet spacing operation) of the video encoder according to the available bandwidth of all its sub-paths to make sure the video data generating rate to match the total available throughput (aggregated throughput));
But, Zhang does not explicitly disclose:
conduct packet spacing operations based at least on the monitored aggregated throughput and a non-zero floor value established by the minimum acceptable interpacket spacing that is smaller than a required pace of the monitored aggregate throughput and relating to the ACK clocked protocol such that if the one or more data packets are being communicated at a faster rate than the monitored aggregated throughput, the one or more packets are delayed ([0044] The time-indexed data structure includes a time horizon which is the maximum period of time into the future that the data or events may be stored. For example, a time-indexed data structure may be configured to include 50 time-slots (a non-zero floor value established by the minimum acceptable interpacket spacing) , where each time-slot represents the minimum time granularity between two events. If the time-indexed data structure including 50 slots was configured such that each time-slot represented a granularity of 2 microseconds, the time horizon would be 100 microseconds… packet may include an identifier which may specify a requested transmission time which is 10 microseconds from the current time. The scheduler 125 may process the packet to determine whether, based on the rate limit policy associated with that particular class of packet, transmitting the packet immediately would exceed the rate limit. Assuming the rate limit is not exceeded, the scheduler 125 may insert the packet identifier into a time-indexed data structure 130 at a position associated with a transmission time 10 microseconds in the future) such that the one or more data packets appear to be communicated at a required pace ([0052] scheduler 125 may evaluate a packet transmission time requested by application 150 and determine if the requested transmission time exceeds the rate limiting (throughput (e.g., if transmission at the requested time would result in too high a transmission rate (high throughput usage) for the packet class given the transmission history of other recently transmitted packets or packets already scheduled for future transmission in that class). The scheduler 125 may process the packets and determine that a transmission time requested by the application 150 violates the rate limit or. If the rate limit or policy is exceeded or otherwise violated, the scheduler 125 may determine an updated transmission time (packet spacing) that does not exceed or violate the rate limit).
Wherein packet spacing operations ([0021] implementations of an efficient single, time-indexed data structure that are configured with a maximum time horizon may further include rate limit policies that specify a minimum supported rate (e.g., a maximum supported time between packets)) are conducted by modifying one or more packet receipt timestamps corresponding to at least one data packet of the one or more data packets, and modification of the one or more packet receipt timestamps includes at least one packet receipt timestamp being corrected to reflect future packet receipt timestamp ([0031] discloses Scheduler 125 may evaluate packets received by the network interface driver 120 and store packet identifiers in the timing wheel data structure 130. In some implementations, the scheduler 125 may evaluate received packet data to determine a transmission timestamp associated with the received packet. Additionally, or alternatively, the scheduler 125 may determine an updated transmission timestamp for a packet received already having a timestamp applied by the application, virtual machine, or container originating the packet, and may apply the updated transmission timestamp to the packet identifier; [0031] discloses; [0043] if a received packet is processed and the scheduler 125 determines that the transmission time for the packet will exceed the rate limit (throughput), the scheduler 125 may update the transmission time with an adjusted transmission timestamp that enables the packet to be transmitted at a later time (future time), to avoid exceeding the rate limit. Contavalli discloses throughput of a link. A mere aggregation of links to aggregate throughput is a mere duplication of a known techniques of Contavalli. The aggregation is an obvious variation that would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art. A mere duplication would not amount to an inventive concept rather it is an obvious variation);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of the combination with Contavalli The modification would allow effective transmission pace control by manipulating the packet time tag information between consecutive packets. The modification would allow dynamic rate control.
Regarding claim 4. The combination discloses the system of claim 1.
Zhang further discloses, wherein the packet spacing operations are adapted to restore to the one or more data packets a packet communications pace as if the one or more data packets were communicated across a single network link (figure 1 discloses pacer applies pacing on data of each path where each data pace on each path is independently implemented that corresponds to substantially similar to pacing if the one or more data packets were communicated across a single network link).
Regarding claim 5. The combination discloses the system of claim 1.
Zhang discloses, wherein the packet spacing operations (fig. 1 implementing pacer on multi-path communication of congestion control) are conducted when the one or more data packets are received at a connection de-bonding device configured to receive the one or more data packets from the set of multi-path network links and to re-generate an original data flow sequence (figure 1, discloses scheduler (debonding device) that is configured to receive data from multiple paths and generate single stream data).
Regarding claim 6. The combination discloses the system of claim 1.
Zhang discloses wherein the packet spacing operations are conducted when the one or more data packets are transmitted at a connection bonding device (figure 1 discloses path buffers) configured to allocate the one or more data packets for transmission across the set of multi-path network links based on an original data flow sequence (figure 1 discloses the path buffers comprising transferred packets for the implementation of pacing operation by the pacer (spacing operation) and distribute data to the plurality of paths).
Regarding claim 7. The combination discloses system of claim 2.
Contavalli discloses, wherein responsive to changes in the monitored aggregated throughput, the processor is further configured to: determine what an ideal sequence of packet receipt timestamps is, and to correct inter-packet spacing of the one or more packet receipt timestamps on one or more data packets that not yet been communicated, such that modified and ideal packet receipt timestamps align across a duration of time ( ([0031] discloses Scheduler 125 may evaluate packets received by the network interface driver 120 and store packet identifiers in the timing wheel data structure 130. In some implementations, the scheduler 125 may evaluate received packet data to determine a transmission timestamp associated with the received packet. Additionally, or alternatively, the scheduler 125 may determine an updated transmission timestamp for a packet received already having a timestamp applied by the application, virtual machine, or container originating the packet, and may apply the updated transmission timestamp to the packet identifier; [0043] if a received packet is processed and the scheduler 125 determines that the transmission time for the packet will exceed the rate limit (throughput), the scheduler 125 may update the transmission time with an adjusted transmission timestamp that enables the packet to be transmitted at a later time (future time), to avoid exceeding the rate limit. Contavalli discloses throughput of a link. A mere aggregation of links to aggregate throughput is a mere duplication of a known techniques of Contavalli. The aggregation is an obvious variation that would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art. A mere duplication would not amount to an inventive concept rather it is an obvious variation).
Regarding claim 8. The combination discloses system of claim 2.
Contavalli discloses wherein the modification of the one or more packet receipt timestamps occurs on by at least one of (i) a sequence on a receiving side, ([0043] if a received packet is processed and the scheduler 125 (receiver side) determines that the transmission time for the packet will exceed the rate limit (throughput), the scheduler 125 may update the transmission time with an adjusted transmission timestamp that enables the packet to be transmitted at a later time (future time), to avoid exceeding the rate limit. Contavalli discloses throughput of a link. A mere aggregation of links to aggregate throughput is a mere duplication of a known techniques of Contavalli. The aggregation is an obvious variation that would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art. A mere duplication would not amount to an inventive concept rather it is an obvious variation).
Regarding claim 9. The combination discloses the system of claim 1.
Zhang discloses, wherein a data packet storing the aggregated throughput or missing information as a data field value (figure 1 feedback packet) is transmitted through an independent control channel and transmitted to at least one of a receiver device or a transmitter device (figure 1 discloses feedback packet sent to receiver. The channel used corresponds to independent channel; page. 4, col. 1 par. 3 discloses at the receiver side, each sub-flow would feedback the packets received information for the sender. Such information is fed to the congestion control to determine the packet sending rate; page 6, col. 2, par. 3 discloses on each acknowledged packet that reports the sent packets received information, the sender would compute the bandwidth).
Regarding claim 10. The combination discloses system of claim 1.
Zhang discloses, wherein the processor is coupled to at least one of a receiver device (figure 1 discloses BBR processing module comprising congestion controller at the receiver side), and a complementary system is coupled to the other of the transmitter device such that the system and the complementary system operate substantially aligned packet spacing mechanisms to determine the aggregate throughput (page 4, col. 1 par. 2 discloses At the receiver side, each sub-flow would feedback the packets received information for the sender. Such information is fed to the congestion control to determine the packet sending rate (packet spacing). The component sending the feedback packet corresponds to the complementary device; page 6, col. 2, par. 3 discloses on each acknowledged packet that reports the sent packets received information, the sender would compute the bandwidth (determining aggregate throughput). The component at the receiving side sending the packets that report packets corresponds to complementary system).
Regarding claim 12. The combination discloses a method for managing data packet delivery flow where one or more data packets are being communicated across a set of multi-path network links, the method comprising:
All other limitations of claim 12 are similar with the limitations of claim 1 above. Claim 12 is rejected on the analysis of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 14. The combination discloses the method of claim 12. All other limitations of claim 14 are similar with the limitations of claim 4 above. Claim 14 is rejected on the analysis of claim 4.
Regarding claim 15. The combination discloses the method of claim 12. All other limitations of claim 15 are similar with the limitations of claim 5 above. Claim 15 is rejected on the analysis of claim 5.
Regarding claim 16. The combination discloses the method of claim 12. All other limitations of claim 16 are similar with the limitations of claim 6 above. Claim 16 is rejected on the analysis of claim 6.
Regarding claim 17. The combination discloses the method of claim 13. All other limitations of claim 15 are similar with the limitations of claim 7 above. Claim 17 is rejected on the analysis of claim 7.
Regarding claim 18. The combination discloses the method of claim 13. All other limitations of claim 18 are similar with the limitations of claim 8 above. Claim 18 is rejected on the analysis of claim 8.
Regarding claim 19. The combination discloses the method of claim 12. All other limitations of claim 19 are similar with the limitations of claim 9 above. Claim 19 is rejected on the analysis of claim 9.
Regarding claim 29. The combination discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium, storing machine-interpretable instruction sets which when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform:
Zhang discloses a method for managing data packet delivery flow where one or more data packets are being communicated across a set of multi-path network links (figure 1 discloses sending packets across plurality of parallel paths), the method comprising:
All other limitations of claim 29 are similar with the limitations of claim 1 above. Claim 1 is rejected on the analysis of claim 1 above.
Claim(s) 2 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Zhang “An Optimized BBR for Multipath Real Time Video Streaming”, and Contavalli (US pg. no. 20180212885), further in view of Bjornstad (US pg. no. 20200336938).
Regarding claim 2. The combination discloses system of claim 1.
But, the combination does not explicitly disclose the one or more timestamps are each provided in metadata associated with a corresponding packet of the one or more data packets;
However, in the same field of endeavor, Bjornstad discloses, wherein the one or more packet receipt timestamps are each provided in metadata associated with a corresponding packet of the one or more data packets ([0079] The destination network apparatus may be configured to use timing information relating to the received information-bearing packets to compensate for packet delay variation—for example, by outputting the received information-bearing packets, from an output of the destination network apparatus, at times that depend on time stamps (packet receipt timestamps are each provided in metadata associated with a corresponding packet) in the packets. This allows the apparatus to correct for PDV. However, using spacer packets to reduce the amount of PDV that might be present can still be advantageous as it can allow the size of the buffer to be reduced, thereby reducing overall latency, as already explained).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of the combination with Bjornstad. The modification would allow passing timing information to effectively sequence received packets.
Regarding claim 13. The combination discloses method of claim 12.
All other limitations of claim 13 are similar with the limitations of claim 2. Claim 13 is rejected on the analysis of claim 2 above.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Zhang “An Optimized BBR for Multipath Real Time Video Streaming”, Contavalli (US pg. no. 20180212885), further in view of Roskind (US pg. no. 20140269359).
Regarding claim 3. The combination discloses system of claim 1.
But, the combination does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the required pace is established based upon a pace determined from receipt of non-redundant data packets of the one or more data packets, the non-redundant data packets distinguished from redundant packets of the one or more data packets through inspection of the one or more data packets.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roskind discloses wherein the required pace is established based upon a pace determined from receipt of non-redundant data packets of the one or more data packets ([0033-0034] discloses in step 304, redundant error correction information is determined for the plurality of packets that corresponds to determining non-redundant packets through redundant error correction. As discussed above, error correction information can be a function of the data contents of the packets for which the error correction information is generated; [0034] In step 306, a transmission of the plurality of packets to a recipient is paced, wherein each of the plurality of packets is separated in time, based on the packet transmission interval. In some implementations, the temporal separation between transmitted packets may be approximately equal; however, in certain implementations the separation between packets can vary, for example, depending on network conditions), the non-redundant data packets distinguished from redundant packets of the one or more data packets through inspection of the one or more data packets (fig. 2 discloses non-redundant packets such as packet A, packet B, and packet C (non-redundant packet) distinguished using redundant error correction 207; [0033] In step 304, redundant error correction information is determined for the plurality of packets (determining non-redundant packet). As discussed above, error correction information can be a function of the data contents of the packets for which the error correction information is generated. in certain implementations an XOR operation can be used to reconstruct missing data. As such, the error correction information can include XOR information for the data contents of one or more of the plurality of packets).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of the combination with Roskind. The modification would allow using non-redundant data to determine effective pacing rate that would not be affected by useless redundant data. The modification would allow a system to effectively determine the right pace of data transmission.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Zhang “An Optimized BBR for Multipath Real Time Video Streaming”, and Contavalli (US pg. no. 20180212885), further in view of Kolding (US pg. no. 20190379597).
Regarding claim 11. The combination discloses the system of claim 1.
Zhang discloses, wherein the one or more data packets are received at a buffer for the one or more data packets (figure 1 discloses each path has buffer to receive packets), the buffer adapted to dynamically increase or decrease in size such that there is no fixed size to define a queue indicative of an order in which data packets are communicated (figure 1 discloses each path has buffer to receive packets and assign packets to different paths adaptively; page 2, col. 1, par. 4 discloses actively reducing sending rate to let the intermediate routers drain the queued buffer when the delay signal exceeds defined threshold that corresponds to buffer adapted to dynamically increase or decrease in size); and
But, the combination does not explicitly disclose: wherein a subset of the one or more data packets are periodically removed from the buffer based on at least on a corresponding age of the one or more data packets in the queue.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kolding discloses wherein a subset of the one or more data packets are periodically removed from the buffer based on at least on a corresponding age of the one or more data packets in the queue ([0012] discloses an MPTCP scheduler schedules both the non-time-critical and the time-critical packets from the same first-in-first-out (FIFO) buffer that corresponds to removing packets based on at least on a corresponding age of the one or more data packets).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of the combination with Kolding. The modification would allow sending packets based on the age of when they are received to avoid delayed transmission of packets
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MESSERET F GEBRE whose telephone number is (571)272-8272. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM-5:30PM.
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, Oscar Louie can be reached on 571-2701684. 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.
/MESSERET F GEBRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445