Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The Office Action is in response to claims filed on 7/31/2026 where claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8, 10-13, 17-19, and 22-34 are pending and ready for examination.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 examiner has reviewed the Applicant’s arguments submitted on 7/31/2026 and are moot based on the new prior art rejections set forth below.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 11, 13, 17,19, 24-25, 28-29, 31-32, and 34 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Li, “HPCC: High Precision Congestion Control”, June 2019, in view of Zhang (US 20130044598 )
Regarding claim 1. Li discloses an apparatus comprising:
a network interface device comprising (Li; A network interface is necessarily present with respect to forwarding devices; see e.g. Section 3.1, Fig. 4):
a network interface and circuitry to (Li; A network interface circuitry is necessarily present with respect to forwarding devices; see e.g. Section 3.1, Fig. 4):
:
adjust a rate of packet transmissions based on a phase of operation and congestion metrics comprising queue depth at one or more intermediate switches, wherein (Li; Li teaches HPCC adjusting its congestion control operation based on in-network telemetry collected from intermediated switches, wherein the telemetry includes the queue length (qLen) at the respective switches. The intermediate switches insert their local congestion information into INT packets, the receiver returns the collected information to the send through ACKs, and the HPCCC sender uses the received network load information, including the switch queue information, to determine and adjust its sending rate. Accordingly, LI’s HPCC congestion-control rate update operation provides the claimed phase of operation, and its rate adjustment is based on congestion metrics comprising queue depth (qLen) at one or more intermediate switches; see e.g. Fig.4, Section 3.1
PNG
media_image1.png
187
354
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
128
318
media_image2.png
Greyscale
) :
Li strongly suggests but does not expressly disclose:
the adjust the rate of packet transmission based on the phase of operation and congestion metrics comprises:
during a Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) slow start phase of operation comprising and based on no indicated received congestion metrics that do not indicate network congestion, adjust a congestion window size by a first level of change to adjust the rate of packet transmission,
during a congestion avoidance phase of operation, based on received congestion metrics that indicate network indication of congestion, adjust the congestion window size by a second level of change to adjust the rate of packet transmission,
the first level is higher than the second level, and
the first level of change is to cause a faster adjustment to the congestion window size than the adjustment to the congestion window size caused by the second level of change.
However in analogous art Zhang discloses:
the adjust the rate of packet transmission based on the phase of operation and congestion metrics comprises:
during a Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) slow start phase of operation comprising and based on no indicated received congestion metrics that do not indicate network congestion, adjust a congestion window size by a first level of change to adjust the rate of packet transmission (Zhang;
[0019] To implement a strategy to control transmitted data, the sender initially sends a conservative number of packets, and gradually increases the number of packets sent with a sliding congestion window (herein termed "cwnd") to control the amount of data sent as the sender evaluates performance of the communication path to the receiver. Generally speaking the congestion window sets the number of packets sent during one round trip time interval.
[0021] “TCP performance generally suffers from the TCP slow-start mechanism in high-speed, long-delay networks. In standard a "slow-start" process, TCP at the sender starts with a congestion window size of one segment (about 4 kB). TCP then exponentially increases the congestion window size, substantially doubling every round-trip time ("RTT") until it reaches a slow-start threshold (termed herein "ssthresh"). The slow-start phase is sometimes referred to as the "exponential growth" phase of the TCP connection. The slow-start threshold (e.g., ssthresh), is a parameter that is initialized by TCP to a maximum window size, or in some implementations, to a random value between zero and a maximum window size ...”
[0005] More specifically, slow-start is used in conjunction with other algorithms to avoid sending more data than the network is capable of transmitting, that is, to avoid causing network congestion. It is also known as the exponential growth phase. During the exponential growth phase, slow-start works by increasing the TCP congestion window each time the acknowledgment is received, i.e., it increases the window size by the number of segments acknowledged.
),
during a congestion avoidance phase of operation, based on received congestion metrics that indicate network indication of congestion, adjust the congestion window size by a second level of change to adjust the rate of packet transmission (Zhang;
[0005] “... TCP enters the linear growth (congestion avoidance) phase. At this point, the window is increased by 1 segment for each RTT ...”,
[0021] “... and a congestion-avoidance phase, which is a linear growth phase for the congestion window, takes over. In Wide Area Networks (WANs), the RTT is generally tens and even hundreds of milliseconds.”
[0022] Various rules are employed by TCP to control the slow-start threshold and the congestion window. In the slow-start phase, TCP operates by increasing the TCP congestion window (e.g. cwnd) by one segment each time an acknowledgment is received. In the congestion-avoidance phase, the congestion window is linearly increased by one segment for each RTT, which continues until a data-loss event occurs. When a data loss is detected due to a timeout, the congestion window cwnd is reset to one. Thus, a substantial reduction in capacity of the connection occurs due to a timeout. When a packet loss is detected, the slow-start threshold is set to half the value of the congestion window and the slow-start phase begins again from the initial value of.)
the first level is higher than the second level (Zhang; Per Zhang’s teaching the first level is exponentially increasing while the second level is linearl increasing thereby resulting in the first level being higher than the second level;
see e.g. [0021], [0022]), and
the first level of change is to cause a faster adjustment to the congestion window size than the adjustment to the congestion window size caused by the second level of change (Zhang; Zhang teaches that the first level of change causes a faster adjustment to the congestion window size than the adjustment caused by the second level of change because the exponential growth of the congestion window during slow start increases the congestion window at a faster rate than the linear growth of the congestion window during congestion avoidance;
see e.g. [0021], [0022]
Examiner note:
The Examiner has relied upon the ACKs taught by Zhang as satisfying the claimed congestion metrics because the metes and bounds of the claim require the congestion metric to merely provide an indication, and Zhang’s ACKs provide the relied upon indication. The claims does not further limit the congestion metric to a particular quantitative measurement or numerical value. The Examiner further notes that Zhang additionally teaches that quantitative network metrics may be derived from ACK feedback. For example Zhang teaches estimating available bandwidth based on the delay dispersion of ACK packets returned from the receiver [0029]. Thus, Zhang further evidences that ACK feedback may provide information from which additional congestion-related network metrics, such as available bandwidth, may be derived)
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Zhang’s scheme. The motivation being the combined solution provides for incorporating a known technique resulting in increased efficiencies in processing network traffic.
Regarding claim 3, Li in view of Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the circuitry is to: during the slow start phase of operation:
adjust the rate of packet transmissions multiplicatively based on congestion metric from the one or more intermediate switches indicating a first level of utilization (Li;
see e.g. Page 45, Colum 2 “... HPCC ... multiplicative increase or decrease ...”;
see e.g. Section 3.1;
see e.g. Section 3.2
PNG
media_image3.png
286
504
media_image3.png
Greyscale
) and
adjust the rate of packet transmissions by additive decrease or increase based on congestion metric from the one or more intermediate switches indicating a second level of utilization, wherein the first level is higher than the second level (Li; Li expressly teaches additive adjustment of the transmission window. The particular magnitude and direction of the additive adjustment constitute optimization of the discloses adjusted control parameter, wherein selection of an appropriate increase or decrease would have been within the ordinary skill in the art based on the desired operating point and network utilization. See MPEP 2144.04 (optimization of res
see e.g. Section 3.2
PNG
media_image4.png
149
393
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The combined solution per Li as multiplicative control scales the transmission rate proportionally and therefore provides faster convergence when a large rate correction is required , whereas additive control changes the rate incrementally and therefore permits available capacity to be probed without unnecessarily large rate changes)
Regarding claim 5, Li in view of Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim1, but does not expressly disclose wherein the circuitry is to apply Data Center TCP (DCTCP) congestion control based on unavailability of queue depth data from the congestion metrics (The combined solution per Li as Li teaches the benefits of DCTCP with respect to its HPCC implantation;
See e.g. Page 53, Column 1:
PNG
media_image5.png
32
393
media_image5.png
Greyscale
)
Regarding claim 6, Li in view of Zhang disclose The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the rate of packet transmissions is based on the congestion window size (The combined solution per Zhang;
[0019] To implement a strategy to control transmitted data, the sender initially sends a conservative number of packets, and gradually increases the number of packets sent with a sliding congestion window (herein termed "cwnd") to control the amount of data sent as the sender evaluates performance of the communication path to the receiver. Generally speaking the congestion window sets the number of packets sent during one round trip time interval.)
Regarding claim 10, Li in view of Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the network interface device comprises one or more of: network interface controller (NIC), SmartNIC, router, forwarding element, infrastructure processing unit (IPU), or data processing unit (DPU)(The combined solution per LI;
See e.g. Page 55, Column 2 “... NIC ...”)
Regarding 11. Li in view of Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 1, comprising a computing system coupled to the network interface device, wherein the computing system is to configure the congestion window size of the network interface device to adjust a rate of packet transmissions to the queue based on Data Center TCP (DCTCP) congestion control (Li;
See e.g. Page 53, Column 1:
PNG
media_image5.png
32
393
media_image5.png
Greyscale
See e.g. Fig. 4; Section 3.1)
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 comprises the same and/or similar subject matter as claim 1 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 comprises the same and/or similar subject matter as claim 6 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 comprises the same and/or similar subject matter as claim 1 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 24. Lin in view of Zhang disclose The apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
the congestion metrics include a reported utilization level value consistent with High Precision Congestion Control (HPCC) protocol (Li; Li receives the INT information from the switches and computes/uses the normalized U(j) (i.e. HPCC’s utilization based congestion information)
see e.g. Section 3.1, Section 3.2, Algorithm 1,
during the TCP slow start phase of operation, the first level of change comprises a multiplier-based increase in the congestion window size and the first level of change is based on the reported utilization level value (Li;
see e.g. Page 45, Colum 2 “... HPCC ... multiplicative increase or decrease ...”;
see e.g. Section 3.1;
see e.g. Section 3.2
PNG
media_image3.png
286
504
media_image3.png
Greyscale
)) and
the congestion window size is to control a transmit rate of packets to the queue (Li; Li teaches that the congestion window size controls the transmit rate of packets to the queue Per Section 3.1 and Section 3.2 Equation 2 above)
Regarding claim 25. Li in view of Zhang disclose The apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
the congestion metrics include a queue depth level and percentage of utilized bandwidth (Li; Li obtains queue length for the switch queue and determines normalized utilization U(j) which includes a bandwidth utilization and transmission rate, i.e., the transmitted rate as a fraction/percentage of the available link bandwidth;
see e.g. Section 3.1, Section 3.2 Equation 2)
during the congestion avoidance phase of operation, the second level of change comprises a multiplier-based change in the congestion window size (The combined solution as Zhang teaches adjusting the congestion window during the congestion-avoidance phase> Li further teaches performing the congestion window adjustment multiplicatively wherein the existing window is changed according to a multiplicative factor K(j) (Section 3.2). The combined solution therefore provides the claimed multiplier -based change in congestion window size during congestion avoidance; Albeit said teachings this feature is also Applicant Admitted Prior Art),
the multiplier-based change in the congestion window size is based on the queue depth level and the percentage of utilized bandwidth and an amount of data in transit (Li teaches that the multiplier based change in congestion window size is based on the queue depth level, percentage of utilized bandwidth, and amount of data in transit. Specifically, Li determines the inflight data from the queue depth and transmitted data over the RTT, determines utilization U using both the normalized queue depth and utilized bandwidth fraction, and determines the multiplicative window adjustment factor; see Section 3.2, Equation 2;
The combined solution provides for applying Li;s utilization-based multiplicative window adjustment during Zhang’s congestion avoidance phase because Li’s multiplier scales the congestion window adjustment according to the measured amount of traffic already occupying and traversing the network, including queue occupancy and utilized link capacity, thereby adjusting the window according to the actual degree of network utilization during congestion avoidance;
Albeit said teachings this feature is also Applicant Admitted Prior Art),
the congestion window size is to control a transmit rate of packets (Li; see e.g Section 3.1, Section 3.2)
the amount of data in transit comprises a Bandwidth Delay Product (BDP) (Li teaches the amount of data in transit comprising a bandwidth delay product because Li expressly determines the amount of data associated with the link using the product B x T, where B is the link bandwidth and ZT is base RZTT such that BT is the bandwidth delay product; see e.g. Section 3.2, Equation 2),
Regarding claim 28, claim 28 comprises the same and similar subject matter as claim 24 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 29, claim 29 comprises the same and/or similar subject matter as claim 25 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale;
Regarding claim 31, claim 31 comprises the same and similar subject matter as claim 24 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 32, claim 32 comprises the same and/or similar subject matter as claim 25 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale;
Regarding claim 34, Li in view of Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
during the TCP slow start phase of operation, based on receipt of congestion metrics that indicate congestion, apply window size decrease (The combined solution of Li and Zhang as Li teaches receiving network-load/congestion metrics from intermediate switches and multiplicatively reducing the senders window based on the measured link utilization U(j), while Zhang teaches TCP operation employing a congestion window during the slow start phase;
see e.g. Section 3.2;
PNG
media_image6.png
170
432
media_image6.png
Greyscale
) and
during the congestion avoidance phase of operation, based on no received congestion metrics that indicate network congestion, increase the window size or maintain a size of the window (Li;
see e.g. Page 49, Column 2, Algorithm 1.
PNG
media_image7.png
123
388
media_image7.png
Greyscale
)
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Zhang and in further view of Briscoe (US 2016/0057065) and in further view of Hira (US 20200220793)
Regarding claim 33, Li in view of Zhang disclose The apparatus of claim 1, Li does not expressly disclose wherein the congestion metrics comprise most congested queue depth in switches along a path from sender to receiver and three or more of: queue depth, link utilization, number of flows that provide packets to a congested queue, most congested switch identifier (ID), end-to-end (E2E) latency, or number of flows that provide packets to a congested queue.
Briscoe discloses:
wherein the congestion metrics comprise most congested queue depth in switches along a path from sender to receiver (Briscoe;
[0090] When data flows pass through a number of buffers in a network, such as along the path through the network in FIG. 1, sometimes more than one buffer will become the bottleneck simultaneously, although it is more typical for the bottleneck to move between different buffers rather than a queue to form simultaneously in two or more.
[0091] In the case of two or more simultaneous bottlenecks, with the unqueuable ECN marking scheme in all of them, the resulting signal will give an estimate of the length of the longest of the queues. If the longest queue is later in the path, this measurement will be rounded up to the next integer multiple of the queue length earlier in the path.
See e,g, Claim 11;
11. A method according to claim 5 wherein if the packets have traversed a sequence of network nodes, each comprising a queue, the node estimating the length of the longest queue.)
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Briscoe’s scheme. The motivation being the combined solution provides for incorporating a known technique resulting in increased efficiencies of managing network traffic.
Li in view of Zhang and in further view of Briscoe does not expressly disclose:
three or more of: queue depth, link utilization, number of flows that provide packets to a congested queue, most congested switch identifier (ID), end-to-end (E2E) latency, or number of flows that provide packets to a congested queue.
Hira discloses:
three or more of: queue depth, link utilization, number of flows that provide packets to a congested queue, most congested switch identifier (ID), end-to-end (E2E) latency, or number of flows that provide packets to a congested queue (Hira;
see e.g. [0038], [0046], [0047])
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Hira’s scheme. The motivation being the combined solution provides for incorporating a known technique resulting in increased efficiencies of managing network traffic.
Claims 8, 18, and 26 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Zhang and in further view of Lee (US 2020/0280518)
Regarding claim 8. Li in view of Zhang disclose The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the congestion metrics include a number of flows that provide packets to a congested queue and link utilization (The combined solution per Li’s Algorithm 1; see e.g. Section 3.1; Li does not expressly disclose flows but it would have been obvious to utilize flows)
As evidence of the rationale above,
Lee discloses:
see e.g [0028] “For example, elephants flows (e.g., large flows), mice flows (e.g., small flows) sharing a same congested port and queue can experience tail drops or ECN marking. By use of an accurate specification of pause time, occurrences of head of line blocking for flows sharing the same link (or queue) from an upstream network element to the congested network element can be reduced compared to use of Priority-based Flow Control (PFC) or pause-based Xon/Xoff”
see e.g. [0046] In some examples, a sender pause time could be set not to completely drain the congested queue but to drain only down to the target (or reference) queue depth used by congestion control schemes. For example, ECN marking algorithms (such as random early detection (RED) or Proportional-Integral (PI)) can include target queue depth as part of parameter configurations. If the SQP pause time is set too long and drains the queue below the target queue depth, the link utilization may go below 100%, hurting application throughput)
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Lee’s teachings. The motivation being the combined solution provides for implementing a known technique resulting in increased network transmittal efficiencies.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 comprises the same and/or similar subject matters as claim 8 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 26, claim 26 comprises the same and/or similar subject matters as claim 8 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Zhang and in further view of and in further view of Bergeron (US 2016/0057040)
Regarding claim 12, Li in view of Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 1, Li does not expressly disclose comprising one or more switches to provide the congestion metrics at a frequency based on a number of flows contributing to congestion in the queue as indicated by the congestion metrics.
However in analogous art Bergeron discloses:
one or more switches to provide the congestion metrics at a frequency based on a number of flows contributing to congestion (Bergeron;
see e.g. [0025] “... frequency of metric generation, a number of packets per flow to per generated ... a number of flows ...”)
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Bergeron’s scheme. The motivation being the implementation of a known technique results in increased efficiencies of packet transmissions.
Claims 22-23, 27and 30 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Zhang and in further view of Attar (US 9,001,663) and in further view of Bensley (“RFC 8257”).
Regarding claim 22, Li in view of Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
the congestion window size is to control a transmit rate of packets to the queue (The combined solution per Li and/or Zhang;
see e.g. Zhang [0019] To implement a strategy to control transmitted data, the sender initially sends a conservative number of packets, and gradually increases the number of packets sent with a sliding congestion window (herein termed "cwnd") to control the amount of data sent as the sender evaluates performance of the communication path to the receiver. Generally speaking the congestion window sets the number of packets sent during one round trip time interval.
during the congestion avoidance phase of operation, the second level of change comprises an addition-based change in the congestion window size (Li; Li expressly teaches additive adjustment of the transmission window. The particular magnitude and direction of the additive adjustment constitute optimization of the discloses adjusted control parameter, wherein selection of an appropriate increase or decrease would have been within the ordinary skill in the art based on the desired operating point and network utilization. See MPEP 2144.04 (optimization of res
see e.g. Section 3.2
PNG
media_image4.png
149
393
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Furthermore additive control changes the rate incrementally and therefore permits available capacity to be probed without unnecessarily large rate changes)
)
The combined solution does not expressly disclose:
the addition-based change in the congestion window size is based on a larger of: (1) a ratio of weightings of queue depth values received in the congestion metrics and a queue depth level based on an Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) marking and (2) a fraction above a target queue depth and consistent with Data Center TCP (DCTCP), and
However in analogous art Attar discloses:
the addition-based change in the congestion window size is based on (2) a fraction above a target queue depth and consistent with Data Center TCP (DCTCP) (Attar;
see e.g. Column 7, Lines 19 – 24 “The DCTCP senders start reducing their window size as soon as the queue size exceeds K. The DCTCP algorithm thus maintains low queue size, while ensuring high throughput . When the value of alpha is near 1(high congestion), the DCTCP algorithm reduces its window by half, as in TCP”
see e.g. Column 8, Lines 50 - 52 “In act 608, a running estimate of the fraction of marked packets is updated by sender 300 using Equation (1) above ...”)
see e.g. Column 6, Lines 55-61),
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Attar’s DCTCP scheme. The motivation the implantation of a known technique results in increased efficiencies of packet transmissions.
Li in view of Zhang and in further view of Attar does not expressly disclose:
(1) a ratio of weightings of queue depth values received in the congestion metrics and a queue depth level based on an Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) marking
However in analogous art Bensley discloses:
(1) a ratio of weightings of queue depth values received in the congestion metrics and a queue depth level based on an Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) marking (Bensley, see e.g. Section 3.3;
The Examiner notes although G is labelled an estimation gain, it function servers as a weight o that balances past vs. current ECN based congestion indications. This weighting of Q depth values through g—together with F as the ration of ECN marked packets constitutes the claimed ration of weightings of Q-depth values and an ECN based Q-depth level.)
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Bensley’s ECN scheme. The motivation being the combined solution provides for incorporating a known technique resulting in increased efficiencies of packet transmission. More importantly it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select the larger of items (1) and (20 to determine an addition based change in the congestion window size because doing so allows the system to respond more aggressively to whichever congestion signal indicates higher stress in the network. Specifically, when ECN marking may underrepresent instantaneous queue buildup (due to marking thresholds or delay), using the DCTCP based fractional queue depth offers finer granularity,. Conversely, when ECN feedback is more timely or accurate, it may capture congestion better than raw queue length. Taking the larger of the two ensures the system errs on the side of reducing transmission more assertively, thus improving stability, reducing packet loss, and ensuring high throughput and low latency across diverse network conditions. Such a hybrid logic would be a predictable combination of well understood congestion metrics to improve network responsiveness.
Regarding claim 23, Li in view of Zhang and in further view of Attar and in further view of Bensley disclose the apparatus of claim 22, wherein the circuitry is to adjust the rate of packet transmission based on an expiration of round trip time (RTT) (The combined solution provides for adjusting the rate of packet transmission based on an expiration of an RTT, because both Li and Zhang use RTT as the operative feedback control interval(see e.g. Zhang [0019]) for regulating packet transmission. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the rae adjustment upon expiration of the RTT so that feedback corresponding to the preceding transmission interval is available before determining the transmission rate for the succeeding interval, thereby synchronizing the rate adjustment with the network feedback interval and avoiding premature adjustment based on incomplete feedback.
Regarding claim 27, claim 27 comprises the same and/or similar subject matter as claim 22 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 30, claim 30 comprises the same and similar subject matter as claim 22 and is considered an obvious variation; therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 13,and 19 are rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Atli (US 2018020565)
Regarding claim 1. Atli discloses an apparatus comprising:
a network interface device comprising (Atli; A network interface is necessarily present with respect to forwarding devices; see e.g. Section 3.1, Fig. 4:
a network interface and circuitry to (Atli; A network interface circuitry is necessarily present with respect to forwarding devices; see e.g. Section 3.1, Fig. 4):
adjust a rate of packet transmissions based on a phase of operation and congestion metrics comprising queue depth at one or more intermediate switches, wherein ([0015], [0020]):
the adjust the rate of packet transmission based on the phase of operation and congestion metrics comprises:
during a Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) slow start phase of operation comprising and based on no indicated received congestion metrics that do not indicate network congestion, adjust a congestion window size by a first level of change to adjust the rate of packet transmission ([0009], [0012]),
during a congestion avoidance phase of operation, based on received congestion metrics that indicate network indication of congestion, adjust the congestion window size by a second level of change to adjust the rate of packet transmission ([0008]- [0009], [0012]),
the first level is higher than the second level ([0008]- [0009], [0012), and
the first level of change is to cause a faster adjustment to the congestion window size than the adjustment to the congestion window size caused by the second level of change(([0008]- [0009], [0012).
Regarding claims 13 and 19, claim 13 and 19 are rejected based on the same rationale as claim 1.
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 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 TODD L. BARKER whose telephone number is (571) 270 0257. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday, 7:30am to 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor Vivek Srivastava can be reached on (571) 272 7304.
/TODD L BARKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449
