CTNF 18/127,881 CTNF 82459 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leguay et al. (US Application 2022/012038, hereinafter Leguay) in view of Esteve et al.(WO2021/229361, hereinafter Esteve) Regarding claims 1,17, Leguay discloses an apparatus (Figs. 4-8,11,12) , a non-transitory computer readable medium ([0040], which recites the methods mentioned above may be implemented as a software code including the code instructions, which implement the above-mentioned method steps. The software may be stored in a computer readable medium. The medium may be a processor memory, any storage medium or the like) comprising: a programmable packet processing (100) pipeline configured to: access a data corresponding to multiple bins (520,550-n,710,730), respective bins associated with multiple packet flows and for respective bins ([0019],[0076],[0135], which recites the input aggregated flow as including a plurality of flows or flow aggregates 550-1 to 550-M multiple bins which are distributed by the network device to the output ports 520-1 to 520-N. FIG. 5A shows an example in which the two heaviest incoming flows (550-1 and 550-2)): identify a single flow associated with a bin of the multiple bins as a candidate heavy hitter flow ([0107],[0135], which recites the identification of the most problematic flows may use predictive models to forecast the size of flows. Once the potential elephant flows have been identified, as shown in S3 in FIG. 12, to identify heavy hitters (large flows) the top N S or largest flows are analyzed to identify which flow must be load balanced separately) . Leguay does not explicitly disclose determine a different packet flow as the candidate heavy hitter flow for the bin of the multiple bins. However, Esteve teaches determine a different packet flow as the candidate heavy hitter flow for the bin of the multiple bins (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, items #90,#94, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Esteve with the teaching of Leguay by using the above features such as determine a different packet flow as the candidate heavy hitter flow for the bin of the multiple bins as taught by Esteve for the purpose of reducing complexity and resource usage, and increasing the accuracy with which HH flows (Abstract). Regarding claim 10, Leguay discloses a method (Figs. 4-8,11,12) comprising: identifying a heavy hitter flow in a data comprising multiple buckets ([0107],[0135], which recites the identification of the most problematic flows may use predictive models to forecast the size of flows. Once the potential elephant flows have been identified, as shown in S3 in FIG. 12, to identify heavy hitters (large flows) the top N S or largest flows are analyzed to identify which flow must be load balanced separately). Leguay does not explicitly discloses by replacing the identified heavy hitter flow in a bucket of the multiple buckets with a second candidate heavy hitter flow. However, Esteve teaches by replacing the identified heavy hitter flow in a bucket of the multiple buckets with a second candidate heavy (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Esteve with the teaching of Leguay by using the above features such as by replacing the identified heavy hitter flow in a bucket of the multiple buckets with a second candidate heavy as taught by Esteve for the purpose of reducing complexity and resource usage, and increasing the accuracy with which HH flows (Abstract). Regarding claims 2,18, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the identify a single flow associated with a bin of the multiple bins as a candidate heavy hitter flow is based on monitored traffic volume of multiple packet flows associated with a respective bin (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claims 3,19, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the programmable packet processing pipeline is to monitor traffic of non-heavy hitter candidate flows in a single datum (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claims 4,20, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the programmable packet processing pipeline is configured to: based on a flow of a received packet corresponding to the different packet flow and the candidate heavy hitter flow, increase a heavy hitter flow vote count for the candidate heavy hitter flow (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 5, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the programmable packet processing pipeline is configured to: based on a number of heavy hitter votes for the candidate heavy hitter flow, cause performance of actions for a heavy hitter flow (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 6 , the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein a single datum of the data is to identify the candidate heavy hitter flow and a number of votes that the candidate heavy hitter flow is a heavy flow and monitor traffic of one or more non-heavy hitter candidate flows (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 7, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the programmable packet processing pipeline is configured to: based on a key value associated with the packet being stored in the data: cause performance of an action, wherein the action comprises one or more of: queue the packet into a lower-priority queue; perform flow rate control; cause the packet to be routed through a high-bandwidth path; identify congestion and report congestion to a sender of the packet; or drop the packet ([0019],[0076],[0135]) . Regarding claim 8, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the programmable packet processing pipeline is configured to: based on a key value associated with the packet being stored in the data and based on a level of heavy hitter vote count, cause forwarding of the packet (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 9, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the programmable packet processing pipeline is configured based on one or more of: Protocol-independent Packet Processors (P4), Software for Open Networking in the Cloud (SONiC), C, Python, Broadcom Network Programming Language (NPL), NVIDIA® CUDA®, NVIDIA® DOCA™, Infrastructure Programmer Development Kit (IPDK), or x86 compatible executable binaries or other executable binaries (page 1, lines 30-37). Regarding claim 11, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the method of claim 10, wherein a programmable packet processing pipeline performs the identifying the heavy hitter flow in the data (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 12, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the replacing the identified heavy hitter flow in a bucket with a second candidate heavy hitter flow comprises updating votes that one or more flows associated with the bucket are a heavy hitter and votes that the second candidate heavy hitter flow is not a heavy hitter flow (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 13, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the method of claim 10, comprising: increasing a heavy hitter vote count for the identified heavy hitter flow based on storage in the bucket of a key value associated with the identified heavy hitter flow (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 14, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the method of claim 10, comprising: based on a count of votes that a flow of a packet is not a heavy hitter flow, causing recirculation of the packet to update the bucket with the count of votes that a flow of a packet is not a heavy hitter flow and a count of votes that one or more flows associated with the bucket are a heavy hitter (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 15, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the method of claim 10, comprising: based on a key value associated with a packet not being stored in the data and based on a count of votes that a flow of a packet is not a heavy hitter flow, forwarding the packet (Fig. 5, item #78, Fig. 6, item #90, fig. 7, Pages 12-13, lines 2- lines 16) . Regarding claim 16, the combination of Leguay and Esteve discloses the method of claim 10, comprising: based on a key value associated with a packet being stored in the data: cause performance of an action, wherein the action comprises one or more of: queue the packet into a lower-priority queue; perform flow rate control; cause the packet to be routed through a high-bandwidth path; identify congestion and report congestion to a sender of the packet; or drop the packet ([0019],[0076],[0135]) . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DADY CHERY whose telephone number is (571)270-1207. The examiner can normally be reached M to T, 8 am to 5pm. 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, Moo Jeong can be reached at 571-272-9617. 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. /DADY CHERY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/127,881 Page 2 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/127,881 Page 3 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/127,881 Page 4 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/127,881 Page 5 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/127,881 Page 6 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/127,881 Page 7 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/127,881 Page 8 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/127,881 Page 9 Art Unit: 2418
Prosecution Insights