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 Amendment
The amendment filed on 01/23/2026 is entered and acknowledged by the Examiner. Claims 1, 3, 10-11 and 18, have been amended. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the instant application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 10 and 18 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8, 10, 12-14, 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thubert et al Pub. No.: (US 2023/0379250 A1) (hereinafter “Thubert”) in view of Falk (WO 2021/122298 A1, filed 12/10/2020, PE2E Machine Translation provided with office action mailed June 2026) (hereinafter "Falk”) and Pham et al Pub. No.: (US 2017/0195292 A1) (hereinafter “Pham”).
With respect to claim 1: Thubert discloses a data diode system, comprising:
one or more processors [0027], [Fig. 2 item 220]);
a memory [0027] [Fig. 2 item 240]); and
one or more programs stored in the memory, the one or more programs comprising instructions configured to [software programs 0029]):
receive an operational technology (OT) data packet associated with one or more asset devices connected to a first network with a first classification (receiving a data packet associated with IOT devices in an operational technology network [0014-0015], [0022], [0115-0116], [Fig. 8 step 810]. The networking equipment provides connectivity via the greater network to any number of network services provided in the local network or the networking equipment and/or remotely [0042], [0112]. Examiner interprets the local network/ingress switch as the first classification of the first network);
compare one or more attributes of the OT data packet to a set of flow rules (determining whether the features of the packet match a forwarding ruleset, and the switch applies the corresponding rule [0014-0015], [0111], [0121], [Fig. 8 step 815]. Examiner interprets a forwarding rule along with a data structure [0029] as a flow rules associated with a flow table).
transmit the OT data packet to the second network based at least in part on whether a match is identified between the one or more attributes of the OT data packet and at least one flow rule of the set of flow rules (forwarding the data packet to the destination based on a determination of whether a matching forwarding ruleset is found with a feature of the data packet [0014-0016], [0111], [0116]. The networking equipment provides connectivity via the greater network to any number of network services provided in the local network of the networking equipment and/or remotely, the services may be provided by servers in a remote data center, the cloud, or the like [0042]. A plurality of routers, switches, load balancers, ingress and egress access switch, etc. for communication between networks [0112], [0116]. Examiner interprets the remote network/egress switch as the second classification of a second network);
However, Thubert does not explicitly disclose select a flow table from a set of flow tables associated with a data diode configured as a unidirectional gateway between (i) the first network and (ii) a second network associated with a second classification;
a set of flow rules stored by a flow table;
Falk discloses a data diode configured as a unidirectional gateway between (i) the first network and (ii) a second network associated with a second classification (the unidirectional data diode are set up in particular to allow only released and/or specialty marked data for transmission from the real second network into the real first network [Page 6]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Thubert in view of Falk in order to have a data diode configured as a unidirectional gateway between (i) the first network and (ii) a second network associated with a second classification;
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would provide an improved transmission device and security from network attacks [Falk: Page 2];
However, Hubert-Falk does not explicitly disclose select a flow table from a set of flow tables and a set of flow rules stored by a flow table;
Pham discloses select a flow table from a set of flow tables and a set of flow rules stored by a flow table (SDN switches can include multiple tables e.g. flow tables for storing the rules based on which forwarding decisions are made [0031], [0037-0038], [0042]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Thubert-Falk in view of Pham in order to select a flow table from a set of flow tables and a set of flow rules stored by a flow table;
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would provide the required scalability for rapidly increasing data traffic and increasing policy rules [Pham: 0005].
With respect to claim 2: Thubert-Falk-Pham discloses the data diode system of claim 1 as set forth above.
Thubert discloses wherein the first network is an OT network and the second network is an information technology (IT) network (IOT devices in an operational technology network [0022] and fog networks [0024]. The networking equipment provides connectivity via the greater network to any number of network services provided in the local network of the networking equipment and/or remotely, the services may be provided by servers in a remote data center, the cloud, or the like [0042]).
With respect to claim 4: Thubert-Falk-Pham discloses the data diode system of claim 1 as set forth above, the one or more programs further comprising instructions configured to:
Thubert discloses apply an instruction set for the OT data packet to cause transmission of the OT data packet to the second network in response to a determination that the one or more attributes of the OT data packet match at least one flow rule of the set of flow rules, wherein the instruction set is configured via the flow table. (adjusting the header when determining whether the features of the packet match a forwarding ruleset [0014-0016], [0115], [Fig. 8 step 825]. The forwarding ruleset is updated for the data packets that did not have a match [0111], [0123]).
With respect to claim 5: Thubert-Falk-Pham discloses the data diode system of claim 1 as set forth above, the one or more programs further comprising instructions configured to:
Thubert discloses transmit the OT data packet via a defined switch port of the second network in response to a determination that the one or more attributes of the OT data packet match at least one proactive flow rule of the set of flow rules (the data packets are forwarded from the source access switch to the access switch of the destination based on a determination that the data packets matches a forwarding ruleset and the metadata including the switch ID and port where the devices are connected [0014-0016], [0115], [0112], [0066]. Examiner interprets proactive flow rule as in rules that are previously established and ready to be executed).
With respect to claim 6: Thubert-Falk-Pham discloses the data diode system of claim 1 as set forth above, the one or more programs further comprising instructions configured to:
Thubert discloses forward the OT data packet to a network controller of the first network in response to a determination that the one or more attributes of the OT data packet match at least one reactive flow rule of the set of flow rules (packet is forwarded to the controller based on satisfying the reactive flow rule that the features of the packets does not match any of the forwarding ruleset [0016]. Additionally, matched packets are occasionally sent to the controller when a matched is identified [0118-0119]. Examiner interprets reactive flow rule as in rules that are executed in response to a determination).
With respect to claim 8: Thubert-Falk-Pham discloses the data diode system of claim 1 as set forth above, the one or more programs further comprising instructions configured to:
Thubert discloses modify one or more portions of a data packet header of the OT data packet in response to a determination that the one or more attributes of the OT data packet do not match at least one flow rule of the set of flow rules (unmatched data packets are modified with a basic compressed header [0136]).
With respect to claims 10 and 12-14 and 16, they do not teach or further define over the limitations in claims 1, 4-6 and 8, respectively. Therefore claims 10 and 12-14 and 16 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 1, 4-6 and 8.
With respect to claims 18 and 19, they do not teach or further define over the limitations in claims 1 and 6, respectively. Therefore claims 18 and 19 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 1 and 6.
Claims 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thubert et al Pub. No.: (US 2023/0379250 A1) (hereinafter “Thubert”) in view of Falk (WO 2021/122298 A1, filed 12/10/2020, PE2E Machine Translation provided with office action mailed June 2026) (hereinafter "Falk”) and Pham et al Pub. No.: (US 2017/0195292 A1) (hereinafter “Pham”) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6, 8, 10, 12-14, 16 and 18-19 above, further in view of Adogla et al Pub. No.: (US 2023/0164224 A1) (hereinafter "Adogla”).
With respect to claim 3: Thubert-Falk-Pham discloses the data diode system of claim 1 as set forth above.
Thubert discloses wherein the OT data packet (receiving a data packet associated with IOT devices in an operational technology network [0014-0015], [0022]);
However, Thubert-Falk-Pham does not explicitly data diode and the data diode is configured for software defined networking (SDN);
Adogla discloses data diode configured for software defined networking (SDN) (a data diode in a software defined network [0083-0084], [0152], [0166]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Thubert-Falk-Pham in view of Adogla in order to implement a data diode configured for software defined networking;
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would provide security for data transmission between two networks [Adogla: 0079].
With respect to claim 11, they do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 3, respectively. Therefore claim 11 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 3.
Claims 7, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thubert et al Pub. No.: (US 2023/0379250 A1) (hereinafter “Thubert”) in view of Falk (WO 2021/122298 A1, filed 12/10/2020, PE2E Machine Translation provided with office action mailed June 2026) (hereinafter "Falk”) and Pham et al Pub. No.: (US 2017/0195292 A1) (hereinafter “Pham”) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6, 8, 10, 12-14, 16 and 18-19 above, further in view of Song et al Pub. No.: (US 2020/0162370 A1) (hereinafter "Song”).
With respect to claim 7: Thubert-Falk-Pham discloses the data diode system of claim 1 as set forth above, the one or more programs further comprising instructions configured to:
Thubert discloses forward the OT data packet to a virtual host of the second network in response to a determination that the one or more attributes of the OT data packet match at least one flow rule of the set of flow rules (forwarding the data packet based on a determination of whether a matching forwarding ruleset is found with a feature of the data packet [0014-0016], [0111]. A network can be a virtual representations in a network-based architecture and a services may be implemented in the local network via a dedicated equipment or virtualized across any number of devices. In some cases, the services may be provided by servers in a remote data center, the cloud, or the like [0021], [0042]). A Fog system including virtualized services and/or data [0024] [Fig. 1]);
However, Thubert-Falk-Pham does not explicitly disclose network function virtualization (NFV) flow rule;
Song discloses network function virtualization (NFV) flow rule (a network function virtualization device can set a clow rule [0064]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Thubert-Falk-Pham in view of Song in order to have a network function virtualization (NFV) flow rule;
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for processing a traffic flow [Song: 0065].
With respect to claim 15, they do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 7, respectively. Therefore claim 15 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 7.
With respect to claim 20, they do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 7, respectively. Therefore claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 7.
Claims 9 and 17, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thubert et al Pub. No.: (US 2023/0379250 A1) (hereinafter “Thubert”) in view of Falk (WO 2021/122298 A1, filed 12/10/2020, PE2E Machine Translation provided with office action mailed June 2026) (hereinafter "Falk”) and Pham et al Pub. No.: (US 2017/0195292 A1) (hereinafter “Pham”) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6, 8, 10, 12-14, 16 and 18-19 above, further in view of Gerecke et al Pub. No.: (US 2014/0075043 A1) (hereinafter "Gerecke”).
With respect to claim 9: Thubert-Falk-Pham discloses the data diode system of claim 1 as set forth above, the one or more programs further comprising instructions configured to:
Thubert discloses a determination that the one or more attributes of the OT data packet do not match at least one flow rule of the set of flow rules (determining that the features of the data packet does not match a forwarding rule set [0016], [0124]);
However, Thubert-Falk-Pham does not explicitly disclose decouple network equipment functionality between the first network and the second network in response to a determination that the one or more attributes of the data packet do not match at least one flow rule of the set of flow rules;
Gerecke disclose decouple network equipment functionality between the first network and the second network in response to a determination that the one or more attributes of the data packet do not match at least one flow rule of the set of flow rules (the virtual sensor stream and physical sensor stream are decoupled when the characteristics no longer matched based on an assessment of the flow rule [0021-0022], [0030], [0033]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Thubert-Falk-Pham in view of Gerecke in order to decouple network equipment functionality between the first network and the second network in response to a determination that the one or more attributes of the data packet do not match at least one flow rule of the set of flow rules;
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to prevent rapid coupling and decoupling of the sensors [Song: 0033].
With respect to claim 17, they do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 9, respectively. Therefore claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 9.
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 extension fee 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 THAO DUC DUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2350. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Gillis can be reached on 571-272-7952. 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.
/T. D./
Examiner, Art Unit 2446
/BRIAN J. GILLIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Prosecution Insights