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 10/14/25, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 17-31 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Craig (Pub No 20210152495) further in view of Gallegos (Pub No 20080279095), Choi (Pub No 20210409478), and Crawford (Pub No 20170109100).
Regarding claim 17,
Applicant argues that the prior art Craig does not teach the device being and edge router and gives examples of SIMATIC IPC847E industrial edge device.
However the examiner disagrees because the device cited in the prior performs routing between two different networks and hence performs the same functions as the device in claim 17. The claim 1 does not cite “SIMATIC IPC847E industrial edge device” as argued by the applicant, therefore it is not required to be a SIMATIC edge device. Fig. 3:
PNG
media_image1.png
327
627
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As seen above the redundancy switch is connected to two different networks 361 and 362 and therefore is interpreted as an edge device.
Also Regarding claim 17,
Applicant argues the prior art does not configure the ports are not configurable with redundancy protocol.
The examiner relies on newly cited Gallegos (Pub No 20080279095) to teach the configuring of the ports for redundancy protocol.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 17 and 31, the first limitation “the plurality of second communication ports is configurable to allow redundant operation" and the second limitation “wherein provision of the redundancy functions is purely software-based and independent of hardware of the edge device” is ambiguous. The metes and bounds cannot be determined. The phrases render the claim indefinite because the phrases are contradicting since the first phase states using ports (e.g. hardware) to provide the redundant operation and the second limitation states that the redundancy function is purely software-based which cannot be due to the first limitation.
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) 17, 25-29, 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Craig (Pub No 20210152495) further in view of Gallegos (Pub No 20080279095), Choi (Pub No 20210409478), and Crawford (Pub No 20170109100)
Regarding claim 17,
Craig teaches an edge device comprising:
a first communication connected to a first public network; (interpreted as Communication interface 507 may include communication connections and devices that allow for communication between computing system 500 and other computing systems (not shown) or services, over a communication network 511 or collection of networks. In some implementations, communication interface 507 receives dynamic data 521 over communication network 511, see para [0059]. For example, computing system 500 could be configured to deploy software 505 over the internet to one or more client computing systems for execution thereon, such as in a cloud-based deployment scenario, see para [0058])
a second communication connected to a second network; and (interpreted as At least two redundant industrial controllers 351 and 352 are connected to both the first LAN 361 and the second LAN 362, wherein the at least two redundant industrial controllers 351 and 352 utilize non-swapping IP addresses (406), see para [0041])
application software which is loadable into the edge device via the first communication; (interpreted as computing system 500 may also represent any computing system on which software 505 may be staged and from where software 505 may be distributed, transported, downloaded, or otherwise provided to yet another computing system for deployment and execution, or yet additional distribution. For example, computing system 500 could be configured to deploy software 505 over the internet, see para [0058])
wherein the edge device is configured such that, via the application software, the second communication is configurable to provide redundant operation of the second network in accordance with industrial redundancy protocol; (interpreted as The at least two redundancy switches 341 and 342 are configured with a redundancy protocol that enables transmission of duplicate data packets over the first LAN 361 and the second LAN 362 (405).. industrial devices, see para [0040])
wherein the application software performs redundancy functions of the redundancy protocol; (interpreted as The at least two redundancy switches 341 and 342 are configured with a redundancy protocol that enables transmission of duplicate data packets over the first LAN 361 and the second LAN 362 (405), see para [0040])
wherein the edge device is configured to receive the application software via the first communication port and to execute said application software upon receipt thereof; (interpreted as For example, computing system 500 could be configured to deploy software 505 over the internet to one or more client computing systems for execution thereon, such as in a cloud-based deployment scenario, see para [0058])
wherein provision of the redundancy functions is purely software-based and independent of hardware of the edge device; to perform the redundancy functions of the redundancy protocol; (interpreted as For example, computing system 500 could be configured to deploy software 505 over the internet to one or more client computing systems for execution thereon, such as in a cloud-based deployment scenario, see para [0058])
wherein the application software provides a user interface for logical assignment of the plurality of second communication ports. (interpreted as In operation, in conjunction with user interface 509, processing system 501 may load and execute portions of software 505, such as redundancy process 400, to function as shown and described herein, and equivalents thereof, see para [0054])
However Craig does not teach using ports; plurality of second ports configurable with the redundancy operation.
Gallegos teaches using ports; plurality of second ports configurable with the redundancy operation. (interpreted as For example, a redundancy protocol may also be implemented above the transport layer, and in some router configurations a UDP or TCP port ID is assigned for such purpose, see para [0023].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the configuring of the switch with redundancy functions as taught by Craig with the configurations with pored ID for assigning redundancy functions as taught by Gallegos with the motivation being to specifically assign.
However Craig in view of Gallegos does not teach wherein the application software provides a test function which checks the edge device for suitability;
Choi teaches wherein the application software provides a test function which checks the edge device for suitability; and (interpreted as Here, the virtual cluster means a cluster including, among a plurality of edge devices, a first edge device to install and test a new application and a second edge device to temporarily install and execute an application currently running in the first edge device, see para [0063])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the redundancy application taught by Craig in view of Gallegos with the testing of applications as taught by Choi with the motivation being to test new programs for error or failure before using
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi does not teach requesting information on the configuration of the plurality of second communication ports, the application software providing a user interface for logical assignment of second communication ports;
Crawford teaches requesting information on the configuration of the plurality of second communication ports, the application software providing a user interface for logical assignment of second communication ports; (interpreted as If the host port assignment interface receives (block 312, FIG. 3) the user's acceptance of the invitation (block 308) to assign the unassigned host ports to a host or hosts, the host port assignment interface GUI displays (block 316) a list of unassigned ports. FIG. 8 shows an example of such a list of host ports which are detected as being currently unassigned as indicated by the host port assignment configuration data structures 60 (FIG. 1). In the embodiment of FIG. 8, the list of unassigned host ports is indicated by indicia 810 of a host port assignment dialog pop-up window 814 of the host port assignment GUI, see para [0048])
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the ports assignments for redundancy as taught by Craig with user interface for port assignment as taught by Crawford with the motivation being to assign ports for transmissions.
Regarding claim 31,
Craig teaches A method for providing redundancy functions in accordance with an industrial redundancy protocol on an edge device comprising a first communication port connected to a first public network and a plurality of second communication ports connected to a second network, the method comprising:
a) loading application software onto the edge device via the first communication port; (interpreted as computing system 500 may also represent any computing system on which software 505 may be staged and from where software 505 may be distributed, transported, downloaded, or otherwise provided to yet another computing system for deployment and execution, or yet additional distribution. For example, computing system 500 could be configured to deploy software 505 over the internet, see para [0058])
b) configuring the plurality of second communication ports via the application software to allow redundant operation of the second network in accordance with a redundancy protocol; and c) performing redundancy functions of the redundancy protocol by the application software; (interpreted as It should be understood that computing system 500 is generally intended to represent a computing system with which software 505 is deployed and executed in order to implement application 506 and/or redundancy process 400 (and variations thereof), see para [0058]. Also interpreted as Communication interface 507 may include communication connections and devices that allow for communication between computing system 500 and other computing systems (not shown) or services, over a communication network 511 or collection of networks. In some implementations, communication interface 507 receives dynamic data 521 over communication network 511, see para [0059])
wherein said providing the redundancy functions is purely software-based and independent of hardware of the edge device; and (interpreted as For example, computing system 500 could be configured to deploy software 505 over the internet to one or more client computing systems for execution thereon, such as in a cloud-based deployment scenario, see para [0058])
configuring the physically connecting the second network to the plurality of second communication ports. (interpreted as Software 505 may direct computing system 500 or processing system 501 to configure the separate physical connections between the at least one application server and the at least two enterprise access switches into a single virtual interface for the at least one application server to provide physical media redundancy between the at least one application server and the at least two enterprise access switches. Software 505 may also direct computing system 500 or processing system 501 to connect at least two redundancy switches to the at least two enterprise access switches and connect the at least two redundancy switches to a first LAN and a second LAN, see para [0054])
However Craig does not teach plurality of second ports configurable with the redundancy operation.
Gallegos teaches plurality of second ports configurable with the redundancy operation. (interpreted as For example, a redundancy protocol may also be implemented above the transport layer, and in some router configurations a UDP or TCP port ID is assigned for such purpose, see para [0023].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the configuring of the switch with redundancy functions as taught by Craig with the configurations with pored ID for assigning redundancy functions as taught by Gallegos with the motivation being to specifically assign.
However Craig in view of Gallegos does not teach wherein said step b) comprises:
performing a check, via the application software, to determine whether the hardware of the edge device is suitable to perform the redundancy functions, said method being terminated if the check is unsuccessful; wherein if the check is successful, the method further comprising;
Choi teaches performing a check, via the application software, to determine whether the hardware of the edge device is suitable to perform the redundancy functions, said method being terminated if the check is unsuccessful; wherein if the check is successful, the method further comprising: (interpreted as If the test passes, the process proceeds from step S305 to step S307, and if the test does not pass, the process proceeds from step S305 to step S311, see para [0108]). Here, the virtual cluster means a cluster including, among a plurality of edge devices, a first edge device to install and test a new application and a second edge device to temporarily install and execute an application currently running in the first edge device, see para [0063])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the redundancy application taught by in view of Gallegos with the testing of new applications as taught by Choi with the motivation being to test new programs for error/failure.
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi do not teach requesting information on the configuration of the plurality of second communication ports, the application software providing a user interface for logical assignment of second communication ports;
Crawford teaches requesting information on the configuration of the plurality of second communication ports, the application software providing a user interface for logical assignment of second communication ports; acquiring information on the configuration of the plurality of second configuration ports; and (interpreted as If the host port assignment interface receives (block 312, FIG. 3) the user's acceptance of the invitation (block 308) to assign the unassigned host ports to a host or hosts, the host port assignment interface GUI displays (block 316) a list of unassigned ports. FIG. 8 shows an example of such a list of host ports which are detected as being currently unassigned as indicated by the host port assignment configuration data structures 60 (FIG. 1). In the embodiment of FIG. 8, the list of unassigned host ports is indicated by indicia 810 of a host port assignment dialog pop-up window 814 of the host port assignment GUI, see para [0048])
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine user interface for redundancy taught by Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi with user interface for port assignment as taught by Crawford since it would have been obvious to try since there are only a limited number of ways to assign ports such as either manually or automatically.
Regarding claim 25,
Craig teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 17, wherein the application software provides a user interface for selecting redundancy functions. (interpreted as In operation, in conjunction with user interface 509, processing system 501 may load and execute portions of software 505, such as redundancy process 400, to function as shown and described herein, and equivalents thereof, see para [0054])
Regarding claim 26,
Craig teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 17, further comprising: a sequential control environment configured to execute on a host operating system installed in the edge device; wherein the application software is loadable into the sequential control environment for execution within the sequential control environment; and wherein the sequential control environment includes an interface for accessing the plurality of second communication(interpreted as Communication interface 507 may include communication connections and devices that allow for communication between computing system 500 and other computing systems (not shown) or services, over a communication network 511 or collection of networks. In some implementations, communication interface 507 receives dynamic data 521 over communication network 511, see para [0059])
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi does not teach accessing ports.
Crawford teaches accessing ports (interpreted as If the host port assignment interface receives (block 312, FIG. 3) the user's acceptance of the invitation (block 308) to assign the unassigned host ports to a host or hosts, the host port assignment interface GUI displays (block 316) a list of unassigned ports. FIG. 8 shows an example of such a list of host ports which are detected as being currently unassigned as indicated by the host port assignment configuration data structures 60 (FIG. 1). In the embodiment of FIG. 8, the list of unassigned host ports is indicated by indicia 810 of a host port assignment dialog pop-up window 814 of the host port assignment GUI, see para [0048])
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine user interface for redundancy taught by Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi with user interface for port assignment as taught by Crawford since it would have been obvious to try since there are only a limited number of ways to assign ports such as either manually or automatically.
Regarding claim 27,
Craig teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 26, wherein the application software comprises at least one software container configured to execute in isolation from other software containers or container groups within the sequential control environment on the host operating system. (interpreted as In operation, in conjunction with user interface 509, processing system 501 may load and execute portions of software 505, such as redundancy process 400, to function as shown and described herein, and equivalents thereof. Software 505 may be implemented in program instructions and among other functions may, when executed by computing system 500 in general or processing system 501 in particular, direct computing system 500 or processing system 501 to connect at least one user workstation to at least two enterprise access switches, see para [0054])
Regarding claim 28,
Craig teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 26, wherein the sequential control environment comprises a software component which directly accesses the plurality of second communication and provides hardware resources of the edge device which are required to perform the redundancy functions. (interpreted as In operation, in conjunction with user interface 509, processing system 501 may load and execute portions of software 505, such as redundancy process 400, to function as shown and described herein, and equivalents thereof. Software 505 may be implemented in program instructions and among other functions may, when executed by computing system 500 in general or processing system 501 in particular, direct computing system 500 or processing system 501 to connect at least one user workstation to at least two enterprise access switches, see para [0054])
However does not teach accessing ports.
Crawford teaches accessing ports (interpreted as If the host port assignment interface receives (block 312, FIG. 3) the user's acceptance of the invitation (block 308) to assign the unassigned host ports to a host or hosts, the host port assignment interface GUI displays (block 316) a list of unassigned ports. FIG. 8 shows an example of such a list of host ports which are detected as being currently unassigned as indicated by the host port assignment configuration data structures 60 (FIG. 1). In the embodiment of FIG. 8, the list of unassigned host ports is indicated by indicia 810 of a host port assignment dialog pop-up window 814 of the host port assignment GUI, see para [0048])
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine user interface for redundancy taught by Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi with user interface for port assignment as taught by Crawford since it would have been obvious to try since there are only a limited number of ways to assign ports such as either manually or automatically.
Regarding claim 29,
Craig teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 27, wherein the sequential control environment comprises a software component which directly accesses the plurality of second communication and provides hardware resources of the edge device which are required to perform the redundancy functions. (interpreted as In operation, in conjunction with user interface 509, processing system 501 may load and execute portions of software 505, such as redundancy process 400, to function as shown and described herein, and equivalents thereof. Software 505 may be implemented in program instructions and among other functions may, when executed by computing system 500 in general or processing system 501 in particular, direct computing system 500 or processing system 501 to connect at least one user workstation to at least two enterprise access switches, see para [0054]. Also see Communication interface 507 may include communication connections and devices that allow for communication between computing system 500 and other computing systems (not shown) or services, over a communication network 511 or collection of networks, see para [0059])
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi does not teach accessing ports.
Crawford teaches accessing ports (interpreted as If the host port assignment interface receives (block 312, FIG. 3) the user's acceptance of the invitation (block 308) to assign the unassigned host ports to a host or hosts, the host port assignment interface GUI displays (block 316) a list of unassigned ports. FIG. 8 shows an example of such a list of host ports which are detected as being currently unassigned as indicated by the host port assignment configuration data structures 60 (FIG. 1). In the embodiment of FIG. 8, the list of unassigned host ports is indicated by indicia 810 of a host port assignment dialog pop-up window 814 of the host port assignment GUI, see para [0048])
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine user interface for redundancy taught by Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi with user interface for port assignment as taught by Crawford since it would have been obvious to try since there are only a limited number of ways to assign ports such as either manually or automatically.
Claim(s) 19-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Craig (Pub No 20210152495) further in view of Gallegos (Pub No 20080279095), Choi (Pub No 20210409478), Crawford (Pub No 20170109100) and Mangin (Pub No 20180048575)
Regarding claim 19,
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 17, however does not teach wherein the redundancy protocol is Media Redundancy Protocol in accordance with International Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-2.
Mangin teaches wherein the redundancy protocol is Media Redundancy Protocol in accordance with International Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-2. (interpreted as the Media Redundancy Protocol (MRP), standardized by the IEC as IEC 62439-2, have been developed so that they can be used in Ethernet-based industrial networks, see para [0004])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the redundancy protocol taught by Craig with the standard for redundancy protocol as taught by Mangin for the benefit of systems from different manufacturers can communicate and function together seamlessly by using standards.
Regarding claim 20,
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 18, however does not teach wherein the redundancy protocol is Media Redundancy Protocol in accordance with International Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-2.
Mangin teaches wherein the redundancy protocol is Media Redundancy Protocol in accordance with International Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-2. (interpreted as the Media Redundancy Protocol (MRP), standardized by the IEC as IEC 62439-2, have been developed so that they can be used in Ethernet-based industrial networks, see para [0004])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the redundancy protocol taught by Craig with the standard for redundancy protocol as taught by Mangin for the benefit of systems from different manufacturers can communicate and function together seamlessly by using standards.
Regarding claim 21,
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 19, however does not teach wherein the redundancy protocol is Media Redundancy Protocol in accordance with International Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-2.
Mangin teaches wherein the redundancy protocol is Media Redundancy Protocol in accordance with International Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-2. (interpreted as the Media Redundancy Protocol (MRP), standardized by the IEC as IEC 62439-2, have been developed so that they can be used in Ethernet-based industrial networks, see para [0004]. Also see ring topology para [0056])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the redundancy protocol taught by Craig with the standard for redundancy protocol as taught by Mangin for the benefit of systems from different manufacturers can communicate and function together seamlessly by using standards.
Regarding claim 22,
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 17, however does not teach wherein the redundancy protocol is High-availability Seamless Redundancy Protocol or Parallel Redundancy Protocol in accordance with Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-3.
Mangin teaches wherein the redundancy protocol is High-availability Seamless Redundancy Protocol or Parallel Redundancy Protocol in accordance with Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-3. (interpreted as Standards such as the High-availability Seamless Redundancy (HSR) standardized by the International Electrotechnical Commission as IEC 62439-3 Clause 5, the Parallel Redundancy Protocol (PRP), standardized by the IEC as IEC 62439-3 Clause 4, and the Media Redundancy Protocol (MRP), standardized by the IEC as IEC 62439-2, have been developed so that they can be used in Ethernet-based industrial networks. See para [0004])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the redundancy protocol taught by Craig with the standard for redundancy protocol as taught by Mangin for the benefit of systems from different manufacturers can communicate and function together seamlessly by using standards.
Regarding claim 23,
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 18, however does not teach wherein the redundancy protocol is High-availability Seamless Redundancy Protocol or Parallel Redundancy Protocol in accordance with Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-3.
Mangin teaches wherein the redundancy protocol is High-availability Seamless Redundancy Protocol or Parallel Redundancy Protocol in accordance with Electrotechnical Commission standard 62439-3. (interpreted as Standards such as the High-availability Seamless Redundancy (HSR) standardized by the International Electrotechnical Commission as IEC 62439-3 Clause 5, the Parallel Redundancy Protocol (PRP), standardized by the IEC as IEC 62439-3 Clause 4, and the Media Redundancy Protocol (MRP), standardized by the IEC as IEC 62439-2, have been developed so that they can be used in Ethernet-based industrial networks. See para [0004])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the redundancy protocol taught by Craig with the standard for redundancy protocol as taught by Mangin for the benefit of systems from different manufacturers can communicate and function together seamlessly by using standards.
Regarding claim 24,
Craig teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 23, wherein the application software performs a Double Attached Node, RedBox or QuadBox function in accordance with the IEC 62439-3 standard. (interpreted as any suitable redundancy switches could also be used. RedBox switches 1101 and 1102 may utilize parallel redundancy protocol (PRP) technology or any other redundancy protocol to achieve a redundant network infrastructure, see para [0022])
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Craig (Pub No 20210152495) further in view of Gallegos (Pub No 20080279095), Choi (Pub No 20210409478), Crawford (Pub No 20170109100), and Koley (Pub No 20080050117)
Regarding claim 18,
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 17, however does not teach further comprising: a data bus formed as a backplane switch; wherein the plurality of second communication ports are connected to the data bus; and wherein the data bus is configured such that an interconnection of the second communication ports on the data bus is configurable via the application software.
Koley teaches further comprising: a data bus formed as a backplane switch; wherein the plurality of second communication ports are connected to the data bus; and wherein the data bus is configured such that an interconnection of the second communication ports on the data bus is configurable via the application software (interpreted as The second port, P.sub.2 of S1 connects to a high-speed data bus 910 through a backplane connector BP 910A, connecting LINE_CARD.sub.A and LINE_CARD.sub.B, see para [0045])
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the effective filing date to combine the hardware/software taught by Craig with the specific hardware/software as taught by Koley with the benefit of performing the same task but with a more specific hardware
However Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi does not teach configurable via the application software.
Crawford teaches configurable via the application software. (interpreted as For example, the assignments may be implemented in response to receiving manual assignments from a user interface or by dynamically assigning ports based on port attributes, see para [0028]).
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine user interface for redundancy taught by Craig with user interface for port assignment as taught by Crawford since it would have been obvious to try since there are only a limited number of ways to assign ports such as either manually or automatically.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Craig (Pub No 20210152495) further in view of Gallegos (Pub No 20080279095), Choi (Pub No 20210409478), Crawford (Pub No 20170109100), and Judd (Pub No 20190306708)
Regarding claim 30,
Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi teaches The edge device as claimed in claim 28, however does not teach wherein the software component filters and evaluates datagrams received via the plurality of second communication ports.
Judd teaches wherein the software component filters and evaluates datagrams received via the plurality of second communication ports. (interpreted as program product of any of Examples 9-10, wherein restrict which data can be routed comprises restrict which data can be routed using at least one of Transport Control Protocol (TCP) port filtering, User Datagram Protocol (UDP) port filtering, and IP address filtering.
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the software taught by Craig in view of Gallegos and Choi for performing the datagrams as taught by Judd with the motivation being of determining how to process the received data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO G NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10pm - 6:30pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached on 571-272-3155. 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.
/BAO G NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2461
/JASON E MATTIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461