Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/329,005

COMMUNICATION DEVICE OPERABLE UNDER MULTIPLE CONTROL PLANES

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jun 05, 2023
Examiner
NEURAUTER JR, GEORGE C
Art Unit
2459
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
335 granted / 438 resolved
+18.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
460
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.1%
-29.9% vs TC avg
§103
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 438 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 20 January 2026 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 9876685 B2 to Srinivasan et al. (“Srinivasan”). Regarding claim 9, Srinivasan taught a method of operating a configurable communication device, comprising: operating the configurable communication device using a first network architecture control plane type (“OpenFlow”; consider column 16, line 53-column 17, line 12); (consider column 7, lines 26-39 wherein the “network captured traffic distribution device” comprises “Distribution management executed by processor 270 may include, for example, the management of a flow of received captured traffic through network captured traffic distribution device 102 and/or a stacked topology that includes network captured traffic distribution device 102. Optionally, the distribution management may include, for example, determining a target destination for received captured network traffic; pre-calculating at least one route for the transmission of received captured network traffic from network captured traffic distribution device 102, through the stacked topology, to a target destination and determining an optimum route for the transmission of captured network traffic from network captured traffic distribution device 102, through the stacked topology, to a target destination”) (consider further column 14, lines 57-65, wherein a “management server” “may control the routing functionality of hybrid communication network 100 by propagating a plurality of rules and/or policies to the plurality of the network captured traffic distribution devices 102 and plurality of OpenFlow switches 104. The rules and/or policies may be stored in a forwarding table (which may be referred to herein as a flow table) and may indicate how the various types of switches should forward the data flow through the hybrid communication network 100”) receiving (at a “management server”) an indication to switch at least part of the configurable communication device to using a second network architecture control plane type (“SDN” including the “Bridge Spanning Tree” protocol) before the configurable communication device receives a packet of data corresponding to the second network architecture control plane type, wherein the indication is received from a user interface subsystem configured to receive a manual input from a user (from a “user”/”administrator” via a “user interface”); and operating the at least part of the configurable communication device in a hybrid mode utilizing both the first and second network architecture control plane types. (consider column 10, lines 55-67 in which the “management service” includes “a configuration module 114 which provides an ability to configure a variety of devices present in hybrid communication network 100. For example, configuration module 114 may provide various configuration options when managing the plurality of network captured traffic distribution devices 102 individually, including model specific settings and filters. In some embodiments, configuration module 114 may be also responsible for bulk configuration and software upgrades of the plurality of network captured traffic distribution devices 102. Furthermore, configuration module 144 may exchange the configuration data related to the plurality of OpenFlow switches 104 with SDN controller 132”) (consider further column 15, lines 16-25, wherein “management server 106 needs to receive flow entries from the administrator or another user/process via, for example, client interface 126 and/or web browser 128 (shown in FIG. 1). These flow entries, again, include information related to mapping logical ingress port 502 of the physical or logical switch 104 or network captured traffic distribution device 102 receiving data packets from an external device to destination egress port 504 resident on another physical or logical switch 104 or another network captured traffic distribution device 102”) (consider further column 15, lines 26-33 and 60-65 and column 16, lines 36-48 wherein “management server 106 periodically determines whether a new data flow entry has been provided by a user and/or another process. In response to receiving a new data flow entry (decision block 604, yes branch), at step 606, management server 106 evaluates the received data flow entry to determine whether the ingress port belongs to one of the plurality of OpenFlow switches 104 supported by management server 106” wherein “if the ingress and egress ports do not belong to the same segment of hybrid communication network 100 (decision blocks 608 and 614, no branches), at step 620, management server 106 finds an optimum bridge connection for the traffic flow being configured” such that “management server 106 may execute one or more network topology discovery techniques and/or other route selection techniques. For example, operations described herein may be executed by management server 106 in conjunction with the Bridge Spanning Tree Protocol (STP)” wherein “[a]fter determining an optimum path, at step 624, management server 106 generates a corresponding traffic policy. As previously noted, management server 106 imposes policies on flows transmitted through the OpenFlow-based segment of the hybrid communication network 100 via SDN controller 132 capable of talking to the physical and or virtual switches 104a, 104b via the OpenFlow protocol. Accordingly, at step 624, the generated policy may be sent to SDN controller 132 via REST adapter 118, for example. Subsequently, at step 626, management server 106 sends a configuration message to the network captured traffic distribution device 102 physically connected to the bridge selected in step 620 to impose the generated traffic policy”) Regarding claim 10, Srinivasan taught the method of claim 9, wherein the first network architecture control plane type comprises a software-defined network (SDN) type of control plane (“OpenFlow”). (again, consider column 16, line 53-column 17, line 12) Regarding claim 11, Srinivasan taught the method of claim 10, wherein the second network architecture control plane type comprises a spanning tree protocol (STA) type of control plane (“SDN”). (again, consider column 16, line 53-column 17, line 12) Regarding claim 12, Srinivasan taught the method of claim 9, wherein operating the at least part of the configurable communication device comprises implementing a network switch with both the first and second network architecture control plane types. (again, consider column 16, line 53-column 17, line 12 wherein “the disclosed software modules enable unified management of both the OpenFlow compliant segment and the stacked topology segment comprising the plurality of network captured traffic distribution devices” such that “the disclosed architecture further allows the seamless combination of a centralized control plane with a distributed control plane system (by combining discovery, filtering and forwarding capabilities among others) in a manner in which either control system can be self-organizing or manually defined while coexisting”) Regarding claim 13, Srinivasan taught the method of claim 9, wherein operating the at least part of the configurable communication device comprises operating a first port using the first network architecture control plane type and a second port using the second network architecture control plane type. (again, consider column 15, lines 19-25, “These flow entries, again, include information related to mapping logical ingress port 502 of the physical or logical switch 104 or network captured traffic distribution device 102 receiving data packets from an external device to destination egress port 504 resident on another physical or logical switch 104 or another network captured traffic distribution device 102.”) (again, consider further column 15, lines 26-33 and 60-65 and column 16, lines 36-48 wherein “management server 106 periodically determines whether a new data flow entry has been provided by a user and/or another process. In response to receiving a new data flow entry (decision block 604, yes branch), at step 606, management server 106 evaluates the received data flow entry to determine whether the ingress port belongs to one of the plurality of OpenFlow switches 104 supported by management server 106” wherein “if the ingress and egress ports do not belong to the same segment of hybrid communication network 100 (decision blocks 608 and 614, no branches), at step 620, management server 106 finds an optimum bridge connection for the traffic flow being configured” such that “management server 106 may execute one or more network topology discovery techniques and/or other route selection techniques. For example, operations described herein may be executed by management server 106 in conjunction with the Bridge Spanning Tree Protocol (STP)” wherein “[a]fter determining an optimum path, at step 624, management server 106 generates a corresponding traffic policy. As previously noted, management server 106 imposes policies on flows transmitted through the OpenFlow-based segment of the hybrid communication network 100 via SDN controller 132 capable of talking to the physical and or virtual switches 104a, 104b via the OpenFlow protocol. Accordingly, at step 624, the generated policy may be sent to SDN controller 132 via REST adapter 118, for example. Subsequently, at step 626, management server 106 sends a configuration message to the network captured traffic distribution device 102 physically connected to the bridge selected in step 620 to impose the generated traffic policy”) Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-3, 5-8 and 17-20 are allowed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments in the instant response with respect to the prior art rejections of claims 1-8 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The § 103 rejections of claims 1-3 and 5-8 have been withdrawn. However, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 9-13 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to G. C. Neurauter, Jr. whose telephone number is (571)272-3918. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Eastern Time. 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, Tonia Dollinger, can be reached at 571-272-4170. 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. /G. C. Neurauter, Jr./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 05, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Sep 17, 2025
Interview Requested
Sep 25, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 25, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 30, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Dec 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 20, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585945
PARAMETER OPTIMIZATION METHOD, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580788
TECHNOLOGIES FOR STABLE HOME LOCATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574324
ROUTE ADVERTISEMENT METHOD, PACKET FORWARDING METHOD, DEVICE, AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574319
PATH AWARENESS METHOD, APPARATUS, AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574344
SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING MESSAGE TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION SERVICE USING MESSAGE STANDBY STATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+10.3%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 438 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month