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 .
1. This is in response to communication filed on 3/20/26 in which claims 1-23 are pending.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The newly added amendment discloses “the circuitry is to generate, following exchange of one or more packet redirection capability advertising messages, information that is to be inserted into the one or more packets”. However, Chao et al clearly teaches wherein “the congestion status of the switch is inferred by: (a) repeatedly monitoring a number of packets received by the reservoir; (b) repeatedly calculating a rate of data detouring to the reservoir based on the monitored number of packets received by the reservoir” (See paragraph [0013]). Furthermore, Chao et al teaches “ the reservoir should intelligently schedule (or “pace”) sending the redirected and buffered packets back to the switch to minimize collision on return, and/or to mitigate traffic surge. The reservoir may infer or explicitly obtain current congestion status to help the pacing decisions” (See paragraph [0066-0068]). One with ordinary skill in the art can confidently conclude that Chao clearly teaches wherein the “the circuitry is to generate, following exchange of one or more packet redirection capability advertising messages, information that is to be inserted into the one or more packets” since Chao teaches monitoring the congestion status of the reservoir and the reservoir intelligently scheduling the packets based on congestion status by actively probing the switch (See paragraph [0066-0070]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 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.
4. Claims 1, 2, 4-10, 12-16 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2017/0289048 to Chao et al.
a. As per claim 1, Chao et al teaches an apparatus comprising: a switch comprising: circuitry to detect congestion at a target port and re-direct one or more packets directed to the target port to one or more other ports for re-circulation via one or more uncongested ports based on congestion at the target port (See paragraph [0050-005, 0054] and figure 6), wherein: the circuitry is to generate, following exchange of one or more packet redirection capability advertising messages (See paragraph [0013, 0066-0070], the reservoir should intelligently schedule (or “pace”) sending the redirected and buffered packets back to the switch to minimize collision on return, and/or to mitigate traffic surge. The reservoir may infer or explicitly obtain current congestion status to help the pacing decisions), information that is to be inserted into the one or more packets (See paragraph [0050, 0059, 0061], an output port selector 750 overwrites the output port if redirection is confirmed); and the information is to indicate that the one or more packets are to be re-sent to the switch (See paragraph [0012 and 0047], packets sent back to the switch are paced such that collisions and congestion at the switch output port is relieved).
b. As per claim 9, Chao et al teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium, comprising instructions stored thereon, that if executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: configure a switch to: detect congestion at a target port based on a level of fullness of one or more queues that provide packets to the target port and based on congestion at the target port (See paragraph [0050]), determines whether or not to redirect the packet based on a congestion level of a buffer associated with the output port) re-direct one or more packets directed to the target port to one or more other ports for re-circulation via one or more uncongested ports (See paragraph [0050-0051 and 0054] and figure 6); wherein: the switch is to generate, following exchange of one or more packet redirection capability advertising messages (See paragraph [0013, 0066-0070], the reservoir should intelligently schedule (or “pace”) sending the redirected and buffered packets back to the switch to minimize collision on return, and/or to mitigate traffic surge. The reservoir may infer or explicitly obtain current congestion status to help the pacing decisions), , information that is to be inserted into the one or more packets (See paragraph [0050, 0059, 0061], an output port selector 750 overwrites the output port if redirection is confirmed); and the information is to indicate that the one or more packets are to be re-sent to the switch (See paragraph [0012 and 0047], packets sent back to the switch are paced such that collisions and congestion at the switch output port is relieved).
c. As per claim 15, Chao et al teaches a method comprising: detecting congestion at a target port and re-direct one or more packets directed to the target port to one or more other ports for re-circulation via one or more uncongested ports based on congestion at the target port (See paragraph [0050-0051 and 0054]); wherein: the switch is to generate, following exchange of one or more packet redirection capability advertising messages(See paragraph [0013, 0066-0070], the reservoir should intelligently schedule (or “pace”) sending the redirected and buffered packets back to the switch to minimize collision on return, and/or to mitigate traffic surge. The reservoir may infer or explicitly obtain current congestion status to help the pacing decisions), information that is to be inserted into the one or more packets (See paragraph [0050, 0059, 0061], an output port selector 750 overwrites the output port if redirection is confirmed), and the information is to indicate that the one or more packets are to be re-sent to the switch (See paragraph [0012 and 0047], packets sent back to the switch are paced such that collisions and congestion at the switch output port is relieved).
d. As per claim 2, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al teaches wherein the circuitry is to identify the target port in the re- directed one or more packets (See paragraph [0050 and figure 6).
e. As per claims 4, 12 and 18, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al teaches wherein the one or more other ports are connected to one or more devices and wherein the one or more devices are to buffer the re-directed one or more packets (See paragraph [0051]).
f. As per claims 5, 13 and 19, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al teaches wherein the one or more devices comprise one or more of: one or more network interface devices, one or more other ports accelerator devices, one or more storage devices, one or more memory devices, one or more host systems (See paragraph [0105]).
g. As per claim 6, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al teaches wherein the one or more network interface devices includes one or more of: a network interface controller (NIC), a remote direct memory access (RDMA)-enabled NIC, SmartNIC, data processing unit (DPU), infrastructure processing unit (IPU), router, switch, or network-attached appliance (See paragraph [0033]).
7. As per claim 7, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al teaches wherein the one or more devices are to transmit the re-directed one or more packets to the switch based on an indication from the switch (See paragraph [0051]).
h. As per claim 8, 14 and 20, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al fails to teach wherein the switch is to receive the re-directed one or more packets and direct the re-directed one or more packets to the target port based on a congestion level of the target port (See paragraph [0051 and 0054]).
i. As per claims 10 and 16, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al teaches comprising instructions stored thereon, that if executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: configure the switch to identify the target port in the re-directed one or more packets (See paragraph [0065]).
j. As per claim 21, Chao et al teaches an apparatus comprising: a switch comprising: circuitry to: based on receipt of an indication of congestion at a target port, provide at least one packet to a different port than a destination port of the at least one packet and direct the at least one packet to the target port, after transmission through the different port (See paragraph [0050-0051] and figure 6), determines whether or not to redirect the packet based on a congestion level of a buffer associated with the output port); wherein the circuitry is to generate, following exchange of one or more packet redirection capability advertising messages (See paragraph [0013, 0066-0070], the reservoir should intelligently schedule (or “pace”) sending the redirected and buffered packets back to the switch to minimize collision on return, and/or to mitigate traffic surge. The reservoir may infer or explicitly obtain current congestion status to help the pacing decisions), , information that is to be inserted into the at least one packet See paragraph [0050, 0059, 0061], an output port selector 750 overwrites the output port if redirection is confirmed); and the information is to indicate that the at least one packet is to be re-sent to the switch See paragraph [0012 and 0047], packets sent back to the switch are paced such that collisions and congestion at the switch output port is relieved).
k. As per claim 22, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al teaches wherein the different port comprises a port with a lower congestion level than that of the target port (See paragraph [0051]).
l. As per claim 23, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Chao et al teaches wherein the circuitry is to direct the at least one packet to the target port, after transmission through the different port and after receipt of the at least one packet from a device connected to the different port (See paragraph [0050-0054]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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, 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 factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
6. Claims 3, 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2017/0289048 to Chao et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 2016/0065477 to White.
a. As per claims 3 and 17, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. However, Chao et al fails to teach wherein the circuitry is to transmit a congestion level indicator to the one or more other ports based on a congestion level of the target port.
White teaches wherein the circuitry is to transmit a congestion level indicator to the one or more other ports based on a congestion level of the target port (See paragraph [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of White in the claimed invention of Chao et al in order to optimize the selection of the targeted port.
b. As per claim 11, Chao et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. However, Chao et al fails to teach comprising instructions stored thereon, that if executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: configure the switch to transmit a congestion level indicator to the one or more other ports based on a congestion level of the target port.
White teaches comprising instructions stored thereon, that if executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: configure the switch to transmit a congestion level indicator to the one or more other ports based on a congestion level of the target port (See paragraph [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of White in the claimed invention of Chao et al in order to optimize the selection of the targeted port.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 9,473408 to Kabbani et al teaches routing with congestion reduction.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DJENANE BAYARD whose telephone number is (571)272-3878. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, John Follansbee can be reached on (571)272-3964. 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.
/DJENANE M BAYARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights