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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending in this Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed in the amendment filed 01/30/2026, have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejections. The reasons are set forth below.
Drawings
The formal drawings received on 01/02/2023 have been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 10, 18 recite receive, through the second path, from the network attached storage device, management information. The support for this limitation is not present in the applicant’s specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 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, 2, 5, 6, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao (US 20030079016) in view of Schlansker (US 20110270987), and further in view of Kurmala (US 20160227552) and Yadav (US 20160080502).
1, 10, 18. Tsao teaches:
A system comprising: – in paragraphs [0006]-[0063] (The video server 10 comprises one or more network attached storage (NAS) servers 12 connected to a management controller (management control station) 14 via one or more switches (routers) 16.)
a first apparatus comprising a network attached storage device; – in paragraphs [0006]-[0063] (The video server 10 comprises one or more network attached storage (NAS) servers 12 connected to a management controller (management control station) 14 via one or more switches (routers) 16.)
a network switch coupled, through a first path, to a port of the network attached storage device; and – in paragraphs [0006]-[0063] (In a switch 16 connected to a 1-Gitabit Internet port for client connection, and to eight or twelve 100-bit NAS server ports, each NAS server 12 is configured with 100-bits/sec piece.)
a controller coupled to the network switch, – in paragraphs [0006]-[0063] (A management controller (management control station) 14 connected to one or more switches (routers) 16.)
wherein the controller is coupled, through a second path, to the network attached storage device, and – in paragraphs [0006]-[0063] (One or more network attached storage (NAS) servers 12 connected to a management controller (management control station) 14 via one or more switches (routers) 16.)
Tsao does not explicitly teach:
wherein the controller is configured to: receive, from a second apparatus, bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device; store, in a data structure of the controller, the bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device; and program the network switch to provide a bandwidth to the network attached storage device by controlling, based on the bandwidth limit information, data transfers using the network switch.
However, Schlansker teaches:
wherein the controller is configured to: receive, from a second apparatus, bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device; – in paragraphs [0012]-[0077], Fig. 3 (A Network Manager 302 connected to at least a Switch 306a. A network manager 302 obtains a guaranteed bandwidth allocation (B.sub.G) for each traffic class from a bandwidth allocation data store 304. Once the routing tables have been configured in each of the edge switches 306 the network may be used by the hosts 102 to send and receive data.)
store, in a data structure of the controller, the bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device; – in paragraphs [0012]-[0077], Fig. 3 (The network manager 302 generates a routing table, based on the guaranteed bandwidth allocation data, such as the routing table shown above in Table 1 and configures each of the switches 306 with the determined routing table. Once the routing tables have been configured in each of the edge switches 306 the network may be used by the hosts 102 to send and receive data.)
program the network switch to provide, through the first path, a bandwidth to the network attached storage device by controlling, based on the bandwidth limit information and the management information, transfers of user data using the network switch. – in paragraphs [0012]-[0077], Fig. 3 (The network manager 302 generates a routing table, based on the guaranteed bandwidth allocation data, such as the routing table shown above in Table 1 and configures each of the switches 306 with the determined routing table. The switch routing tables provide a convenient mechanism for distributing the available bandwidth of the network 100 among the different traffic classes. Once the routing tables have been configured in each of the edge switches 306 the network may be used by the hosts 102 to send and receive data. Each edge switch allocates each data packet received from a host to a traffic class defined by the routing table. Each edge switch then routes the data packets over the appropriate VLAN as defined in the switch routing table.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tsao with Schlansker to include a controller coupled to the network switch, wherein the controller is configured to: receive, from a second apparatus, bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device; store, in a data structure of the controller, the bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device; and program the network switch to provide a bandwidth to the network attached storage device by controlling, based on the bandwidth limit information, data transfers using the network switch, as taught by Schlansker, in paragraphs [0002]-[0004], to enable any host connected to the network to be able to send data to and receive data from any other host connected to the network and to prevent a host from making excessive use of the available bandwidth to disrupt the network activities of other hosts.
Combination of Tsao and Schlansker does not explicitly teach:
the bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device.
However, Kurmala teaches:
the bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device – in paragraphs [0012]-[0070] (The profiles can define bandwidth contract assignment for each client device, which indicates the maximum bandwidth that a particular client device can use per second when the RAP has switched from a wired high bandwidth uplink to a cellular low bandwidth uplink (hereinafter referred to as “BW-Per-Client”). Specifically, the profiles can specify how much upstream bandwidth and how much downstream bandwidth can be allowed for the particular client device with a high bandwidth uplink connection and/or with a low bandwidth uplink connection.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tsao and Schlansker with Kurmala to include the bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device, as taught by Kurmala, in paragraphs [0002]-[0014], to provide adaptive resource allocation in congested network deployment.
Combination of Tsao, Schlansker, and Kurmala does not explicitly teach:
However, Yadav teaches:
receive, through the second path, from the network attached storage device, management information; and – in paragraphs [0170]-[0897] (Based on application type detection, a multi-tenant controller 122 may analyze application session data that it receives from configurable device 124 at the branch 152 level to determine what amount of bandwidth is necessary for proper application performance. Application performance scores may be used to record and adjust the bandwidth profile for an application, where the profile states performance and bandwidth criteria needed (i.e., a rule) for the type(s) of data flows detected during application sessions. Determining a network requirement for at least one application, dynamically determining a link suitable for data transmission in accordance with a policy based at least in part on a current network condition to meet the network requirement and routing one or more application network data flows associated with the at least one application over the link.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tsao, Schlansker, and Kurmala with Yadav to include receive, through the second path, from the network attached storage device, management information, as taught by Yadav, in paragraphs [0002]-[0144], to provide a technique for flexibly defined communication network controller-based control, operations, and management of networks using a multi-tenant controller.
2, 11. The system of claim 1, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Kurmala teaches:
wherein the bandwidth limit information for the network attached storage device comprises at least one of an ingress bandwidth or an egress bandwidth for the network attached storage device. – in paragraphs [0012]-[0070] (The profiles can define bandwidth contract assignment for each client device, which indicates the maximum bandwidth that a particular client device can use per second when the RAP has switched from a wired high bandwidth uplink to a cellular low bandwidth uplink (hereinafter referred to as “BW-Per-Client”). Specifically, the profiles can specify how much upstream bandwidth and how much downstream bandwidth can be allowed for the particular client device with a high bandwidth uplink connection and/or with a low bandwidth uplink connection.)
5, 14. The system of claim 1, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Schlansker teaches:
further comprising an interconnect switch coupled between the controller and the network attached storage device. – in paragraphs [0012]-[0077], Fig. 3 (A Network Manager 302 is connected to at least one Switch 306a and the at least one Switch 306a is connected to at least one Host 102.)
6, 15. The system of claim 1, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Schlansker teaches:
wherein the controller is coupled to the network attached storage device using the network switch. – in paragraphs [0012]-[0077], Fig. 3 (A Network Manager 302 is connected to at least one Switch 306a and the at least one Switch 306a is connected to at least one Host 102.)
20. The method of claim 18, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Schlansker teaches:
wherein the controller receives the bandwidth limit information from an administrator. – in paragraphs [0012]-[0077], Fig. 3 (The guaranteed bandwidths B.sub.G of each traffic class stored in the bandwidth allocation store 304 may be modified, if required, during operation of the network. Such a modification may be performed, for example, by an appropriate system manager or administrator. A network manager 302 obtains a guaranteed bandwidth allocation (B.sub.G) for each traffic class from a bandwidth allocation data store 304. Once the routing tables have been configured in each of the edge switches 306 the network may be used by the hosts 102 to send and receive data.)
Claim(s) 3, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao (US 20030079016) in view of Schlansker (US 20110270987), and further in view of Kurmala (US 20160227552), Yadav (US 20160080502), and Sanda (US 20160381693).
3, 12. The system of claim 2, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, and Yadav does not explicitly teach:
wherein the bandwidth limit information is based on a service level associated with the network attached storage device.
However, Sanda teaches:
wherein the bandwidth limit information is based on a service level associated with the network attached storage device. – in paragraphs [0019]-[0039] (These business rules may include data such as total available bandwidth, guaranteed bandwidth to be assigned to a particular enterprise based on a service contract, minimum acceptable session throughput for each different service plan at different times of day, different days of the week, or different seasons, and minimum acceptable packet loss for different IP applications, such as VoIP, Web browsing, P2P, and email. These business rules may also include bandwidth allotments and performance thresholds for different types and models of end-user devices, such as smartphones, tablet PCs, USB cellular modems, and cellular routers.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, and Yadav with Sanda to include wherein the bandwidth limit information is based on a service level associated with the network attached storage device, as taught by Sanda, in paragraphs [0002]-[0020], to be able to control network data traffic more responsively at a finer level based on specific services that they offer, and utilize the network resources in a cost effective manner.
Claim(s) 4, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao (US 20030079016) in view of Schlansker (US 20110270987), and further in view of Kurmala (US 20160227552), Yadav (US 20160080502), Sanda (US 20160381693), and Kakadia (US 20130336229).
4, 13. The system of claim 3, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, Yadav, and Sanda does not explicitly teach:
wherein management information is based on one or more parameters of the network attached storage device.
However, Kakadia teaches:
wherein management information is based on one or more parameters of the network attached storage device. – in paragraphs (User device characteristics may include a QoS associated with user device 260. For example, bandwidth may be allocated to ensure that QoS requirements are met. QoS requirements may include a service response time, a transmission delay, a signal-to-noise ratio, a packet error loss rate, a required bit rate, a bit error rate, etc.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, Yadav, and Sanda with Kakadia to include wherein management information is based on one or more parameters of the network attached storage device, as taught by Kakadia, in paragraphs [0001]-[0014], to able to more fairly allocate network bandwidth to end user devices.
Claim(s) 7, 8, 16, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao (US 20030079016) in view of Schlansker (US 20110270987), and further in view of Kurmala (US 20160227552), Yadav (US 20160080502), and Kakadia (US 20130336229).
7, 16. The system of claim 1, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, and Yadav does not explicitly teach:
wherein the management information is based on at least one parameter associated with the network attached storage device.
However, Kakadia teaches:
wherein the management information is based on at least one parameter associated with the network attached storage device. – in paragraphs (User device characteristics may include a QoS associated with user device 260. For example, bandwidth may be allocated to ensure that QoS requirements are met. QoS requirements may include a service response time, a transmission delay, a signal-to-noise ratio, a packet error loss rate, a required bit rate, a bit error rate, etc.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, and Yadav with Kakadia to include wherein the management information is based on at least one parameter associated with the network attached storage device, as taught by Kakadia, in paragraphs [0001]-[0014], to able to more fairly allocate network bandwidth to end user devices.
8, 17. The system of claim 7, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Kakadia teaches:
the at least one parameter comprises one or more of a bit error rate or an operating temperature. – in paragraphs (User device characteristics may include a QoS associated with user device 260. For example, bandwidth may be allocated to ensure that QoS requirements are met. QoS requirements may include a service response time, a transmission delay, a signal-to-noise ratio, a packet error loss rate, a required bit rate, a bit error rate, etc.)
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao (US 20030079016) in view of Schlansker (US 20110270987), and further in view of Kurmala (US 20160227552), Yadav (US 20160080502), and Qin (US 20170139592).
9. The system of claim 1, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, and Yadav does not explicitly teach:
wherein the controller comprises a baseboard management controller.
However, Qin teaches:
wherein the controller comprises a baseboard management controller. – in paragraphs [0006]-[0034] (The server system 100 includes a plurality of server nodes Node1 to NodeM, a baseboard management controller BMC and a switch module SW.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, and Yadav with Qin to include wherein the controller comprises a baseboard management controller, as taught by Qin, in paragraphs [0003]-[0010], to monitor the physical states of every server node and the network.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao (US 20030079016) in view of Schlansker (US 20110270987), and further in view of Kurmala (US 20160227552), Yadav (US 20160080502), and Armstrong (US 6578186).
19. The method of claim 18, – refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, and Yadav does not explicitly teach:
wherein the controller: receives one or more commands; and configures the network switch based on at least one of the one or more commands.
However, Armstrong teaches:
wherein the controller: receives one or more commands; and configures the network switch based on at least one of the one or more commands. – on lines 1-67 in columns 1-5 (The configuration controller receives a configuration command, configures the programmable device in response to receiving the configuration command, and sets a flag indicating the status of the configuring operation.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tsao, Schlansker, Kurmala, and Yadav with Armstrong to include wherein the controller: receives one or more commands; and configures the network switch based on at least one of the one or more commands, as taught by Armstrong, on lines 1-67 in columns 1-2, to improve logic device configuration.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 MUHAMMAD RAZA whose telephone number is (571)272-7734. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 A.M.-5:00 P.M..
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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached on (571)272-7304. 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.
/MUHAMMAD RAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449