DETAILED ACTION
Applicant's submission filed on 13 April 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 6, 9, 10, 12-14, 17, and 20 are currently amended; no claims are cancelled; claims 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 15, 16, 18, and 19 are previously presented; no claims have been added. Claims 1-20 are pending and ready for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed 13 April 2026, with respect to “Double Patenting” have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states that a terminal disclaimer is being filed herein. However, no terminal disclaimer has been filed for this application. The examiner will withdraw the double patenting rejection when a terminal disclaimer has been filed, but in the meantime will hold this rejection in abeyance.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of 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, 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 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, 12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claasen et al. (US 2017/0230877 A1), hereafter referred Claasen, in view of Chiba et al. (US 2020/0053615 A1), hereafter referred Chiba, further in view of WO 2017/172796 A1, hereafter referred Kant.
Regarding claim 1, Claasen teaches a computer-implemented method comprising:
establishing, by a terminal, one or more first communication tunnels between a SD-WAN router of the terminal and a first SD-WAN gateway via one or more modems, including a modem that is associated to a first air-to-ground (ATG) gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; terminal attaches to the network, such as an aircraft using an LTE based Air-to-Ground (ATG) network and select a serving cell according to a best available base station where a tunnel is formed between PGW and SGW via the base station, where the tunnel is referred as the S5 tunnel);
after establishing the one or more first communication tunnels and carrying traffic from one or more client devices over the one or more first communication tunnels, detecting, by the terminal, that the modem has changed its association to a second ATG gateway that is different from the first ATG gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored);
in response to detecting that the modem has changed its association to the second ATG gateway, selecting, by the terminal, a second SD-WAN gateway from a set of multiple SD-WAN gateways based on a relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored);
determining, by the terminal, whether one or more criteria for establishing an additional communication tunnel have been satisfied (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored); and
in response to determining that the one or more criteria for establishing an additional communication tunnel have been satisfied, establishing, by the terminal, one or more second communication tunnels between the SD-WAN router and the second SD-WAN gateway while maintaining the one or more first communication tunnels that the SD-WAN router established with the first SD-WAN gateway (Claasen, Fig. 3-6, [0035]-[0071]; before handover from base station 1 to base station 2, the terminal is served by SGW 1 and PGW 1 where a GTP tunnel between SGW1 and PGW 1 is used. A S1 or X2 handover with SGW relocation triggers a tunnel between the new SGW and existing PGW to be established, where prior to a determination that the handover has completed successfully, the first GTP tunnel between SGW 1 and PGW 1 and the second GTP tunnel between SGW 2 and PGW 2 are both active and used for user traffic).
While Claasen teaches its method in the context of 3GPP and LTE technology (Claasen, [0027]), Claasen does not expressly teach that 5G technology enables the terminal to perform the functions that previously were performed by the MME.
However, Chiba teaches 5G technology enables the terminal to perform functions that previously were performed by the MME (Chiba, [0006]-[0007] and [0044]-[0045]; in NextGen systems like 5G, the PDN connection may be a connection established by the UE between the UE and PGW via an eNB and a SGW).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen to include the above recited limitations as taught by Chiba in order to accommodate a terminal connected to various access networks and communicate various user data (Chiba, [0016]).
Claasen in view of Chiba does not expressly teach wherein the one or more criteria comprise a minimum amount of time having elapsed since the first communication tunnel with the first SD-WAN router was established.
However, Kant teaches wherein the one or more criteria comprise a minimum amount of time having elapsed since the first communication tunnel with the first SD-WAN router was established (Kant, Fig. 1-4, [0016]-[0023]; an airplane leaves one city bound for another (for example leaves Miami bound for San Francisco) and the ABR-UE and AP has started and connected to P-GW1 104A at time T1. The time elapsed to Time T2 and the airplane has progressed to being over Tennessee where a connection is made with P-GW2 104C at time T2, so in the context of a flight the AP may force a redirect to the closest P-GW 104A-J based on time and location throughout the flight, where in step 414 it is determined whether or not it is time to establish the connection or not and the operation can be done in a UE itself).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba to include the above recited limitations as taught by Kant in order to reduce propagation delays of P-GWs (Kant, [0015]).
Regarding claim 12, Claasen teaches a terminal comprising:
one or more processors and one or more storage devices storing instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to cause the terminal (Claasen, Fig. 7, [0072]-[0076]; the apparatus may include processing circuitry of a computer and the processing circuitry can execute software commands) to perform operations comprising:
establishing, by a terminal, one or more first communication tunnels between a SD-WAN router of the terminal and a first SD-WAN gateway via one or more modems, including a modem that is associated to a first air-to-ground (ATG) gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; terminal attaches to the network, such as an aircraft using an LTE based Air-to-Ground (ATG) network and select a serving cell according to a best available base station where a tunnel is formed between PGW and SGW via the base station, where the tunnel is referred as the S5 tunnel);
after establishing the one or more first communication tunnels and carrying traffic from one or more client devices over the one or more first communication tunnels, detecting, by the terminal, that the modem has changed its association to a second ATG gateway that is different from the first ATG gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored);
in response to detecting that the modem has changed its association to the second ATG gateway, selecting, by the terminal, a second SD-WAN gateway from a set of multiple SD-WAN gateways based on a relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored);
determining, by the terminal, whether one or more criteria for establishing an additional communication tunnel have been satisfied (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored); and
in response to determining that the one or more criteria for establishing an additional communication tunnel have been satisfied, establishing, by the terminal, one or more second communication tunnels between the SD-WAN router and the second SD-WAN gateway while maintaining the one or more first communication tunnels that the SD-WAN router established with the first SD-WAN gateway (Claasen, Fig. 3-6, [0035]-[0071]; before handover from base station 1 to base station 2, the terminal is served by SGW 1 and PGW 1 where a GTP tunnel between SGW1 and PGW 1 is used. A S1 or X2 handover with SGW relocation triggers a tunnel between the new SGW and existing PGW to be established, where prior to a determination that the handover has completed successfully, the first GTP tunnel between SGW 1 and PGW 1 and the second GTP tunnel between SGW 2 and PGW 2 are both active and used for user traffic).
While Claasen teaches its method in the context of 3GPP and LTE technology (Claasen, [0027]), Claasen does not expressly teach that 5G technology enables the terminal to perform the functions that previously were performed by the MME.
However, Chiba teaches 5G technology enables the terminal to perform functions that previously were performed by the MME (Chiba, [0006]-[0007] and [0044]-[0045]; in NextGen systems like 5G, the PDN connection may be a connection established by the UE between the UE and PGW via an eNB and a SGW).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen to include the above recited limitations as taught by Chiba in order to accommodate a terminal connected to various access networks and communicate various user data (Chiba, [0016]).
Claasen in view of Chiba does not expressly teach wherein the one or more criteria comprise a minimum amount of time having elapsed since the first communication tunnel with the first SD-WAN router was established.
However, Kant teaches wherein the one or more criteria comprise a minimum amount of time having elapsed since the first communication tunnel with the first SD-WAN router was established (Kant, Fig. 1-4, [0016]-[0023]; an airplane leaves one city bound for another (for example leaves Miami bound for San Francisco) and the ABR-UE and AP has started and connected to P-GW1 104A at time T1. The time elapsed to Time T2 and the airplane has progressed to being over Tennessee where a connection is made with P-GW2 104C at time T2, so in the context of a flight the AP may force a redirect to the closest P-GW 104A-J based on time and location throughout the flight, where in step 414 it is determined whether or not it is time to establish the connection or not and the operation can be done in a UE itself).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba to include the above recited limitations as taught by Kant in order to reduce propagation delays of P-GWs (Kant, [0015]).
Regarding claim 20, Claasen teaches one or more storage devices storing instructions that are operable, when executed by one or more processors, to cause the one or more processors to perform operations (Claasen, Fig. 7, [0072]-[0076]; the apparatus may include processing circuitry of a computer and the processing circuitry can execute software commands) comprising:
establishing, by a terminal, one or more first communication tunnels between a SD-WAN router of the terminal and a first SD-WAN gateway via one or more modems, including a modem that is associated to a first air-to-ground (ATG) gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; terminal attaches to the network, such as an aircraft using an LTE based Air-to-Ground (ATG) network and select a serving cell according to a best available base station where a tunnel is formed between PGW and SGW via the base station, where the tunnel is referred as the S5 tunnel);
after establishing the one or more first communication tunnels and carrying traffic from one or more client devices over the one or more first communication tunnels, detecting, by the terminal, that the modem has changed its association to a second ATG gateway that is different from the first ATG gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored);
in response to detecting that the modem has changed its association to the second ATG gateway, selecting, by the terminal, a second SD-WAN gateway from a set of multiple SD-WAN gateways based on a relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored);
determining, by the terminal, whether one or more criteria for establishing an additional communication tunnel have been satisfied (Claasen, Fig. 1-2, [0027]-[0033]; as the terminal travels across the network, it may handover between different base stations generally based on signal strength where the terminal may handover to a base station no longer supported by the initially assigned SGW, the S5 interface implements a re-location and user data is tunneled between the newly assigned SGW and the same PGW to which the terminal is anchored); and
in response to determining that the one or more criteria for establishing an additional communication tunnel have been satisfied, establishing, by the terminal, one or more second communication tunnels between the SD-WAN router and the second SD-WAN gateway while maintaining the one or more first communication tunnels that the SD-WAN router established with the first SD-WAN gateway (Claasen, Fig. 3-6, [0035]-[0071]; before handover from base station 1 to base station 2, the terminal is served by SGW 1 and PGW 1 where a GTP tunnel between SGW1 and PGW 1 is used. A S1 or X2 handover with SGW relocation triggers a tunnel between the new SGW and existing PGW to be established, where prior to a determination that the handover has completed successfully, the first GTP tunnel between SGW 1 and PGW 1 and the second GTP tunnel between SGW 2 and PGW 2 are both active and used for user traffic).
While Claasen teaches its method in the context of 3GPP and LTE technology (Claasen, [0027]), Claasen does not expressly teach that 5G technology enables the terminal to perform the functions that previously were performed by the MME.
However, Chiba teaches 5G technology enables the terminal to perform functions that previously were performed by the MME (Chiba, [0006]-[0007] and [0044]-[0045]; in NextGen systems like 5G, the PDN connection may be a connection established by the UE between the UE and PGW via an eNB and a SGW).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen to include the above recited limitations as taught by Chiba in order to accommodate a terminal connected to various access networks and communicate various user data (Chiba, [0016]).
Claasen in view of Chiba does not expressly teach wherein the one or more criteria comprise a minimum amount of time having elapsed since the first communication tunnel with the first SD-WAN router was established.
However, Kant teaches wherein the one or more criteria comprise a minimum amount of time having elapsed since the first communication tunnel with the first SD-WAN router was established (Kant, Fig. 1-4, [0016]-[0023]; an airplane leaves one city bound for another (for example leaves Miami bound for San Francisco) and the ABR-UE and AP has started and connected to P-GW1 104A at time T1. The time elapsed to Time T2 and the airplane has progressed to being over Tennessee where a connection is made with P-GW2 104C at time T2, so in the context of a flight the AP may force a redirect to the closest P-GW 104A-J based on time and location throughout the flight, where in step 414 it is determined whether or not it is time to establish the connection or not and the operation can be done in a UE itself).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba to include the above recited limitations as taught by Kant in order to reduce propagation delays of P-GWs (Kant, [0015]).
Claims 2 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Condoluci et al. (US 2021/0153078 A1), hereafter referred Condoluci. Condoluci was cited by applicant’s IDS filed 4 December 2025.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the terminal of claim 12 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach wherein the one or more criteria comprise at least one of (i) the relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway being maintained for at least a minimum amount of time, (ii) a limit for a maximum number of concurrently active SD-WAN registrations is not exceeded, or (iii) a minimum amount of time has elapsed since the SD-WAN router most recently established a communication tunnel with a SD-WAN gateway other than the second SD-WAN gateway.
However, Condoluci teaches wherein the one or more criteria comprise at least one of (i) the relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway being maintained for at least a minimum amount of time, (ii) a limit for a maximum number of concurrently active SD-WAN registrations is not exceeded, or (iii) a minimum amount of time has elapsed since the SD-WAN router most recently established a communication tunnel with a SD-WAN gateway other than the second SD-WAN gateway (Condoluci, [0088]; when deciding whether to trigger a bearer adjustment, the PCF/SMF/RAN can compute whether the adjustment is expected to be kept for a time interval at least equal to the minimum bearer duration).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Condoluci in order to allow the network to compute how long the changes in the bearer configuration are expected to be kept (Condoluci, [0088]).
Claims 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Altman (US 2020/0204484 A1).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the terminal of claim 12 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach wherein the one or more modems comprise multiple modems that associate to different ATG gateways; and wherein the method comprises monitoring each of the multiple modems to detect when any of the multiple modems changes its association to a different ATG gateway.
However, Altman teaches wherein the one or more modems comprise multiple modems that associate to different ATG gateways; and wherein the method comprises monitoring each of the multiple modems to detect when any of the multiple modems changes its association to a different ATG gateway (Altman, [0072]-[0075]; when measured or monitored conditions change at any level between multiple connections including modems and gateways may change and the decision of whether to change as well as resource allocation may be done by a device in the network).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Altman in order to respond to such changes in conditions or performance (Altman, [0074]).
Claims 4, 5, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Sherman (US 9,668,195 B2).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the terminal of claim 12 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach wherein the terminal is configured to send and receive data through the one or more second communication tunnels via the second SD-WAN gateway and concurrently send and receive data through the one or more first communication tunnels via the first SD-WAN gateway.
However, Sherman teaches wherein the terminal is configured to send and receive data through the one or more second communication tunnels via the second SD-WAN gateway and concurrently send and receive data through the one or more first communication tunnels via the first SD-WAN gateway (Sherman, Fig. 5-6, Column 30, line 48-Column 32, line 32; the base station encapsulates the data in a GTP tunnel to the mobile station when it registers to the mobile relay network APN where the destination address is of the gateway P/S-GW that was assigned to mobile station. The gateway redirects the tunneled packet to another gateway in a second GTP tunnel and forwards the IP traffic to the router again).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Sherman in order to enable multi-hop tunneling capability without impacting the mobile stations (Sherman, Column 33, lines 4-16).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the terminal of claim 12 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach comprising:
after establishing the one or more first communication tunnels with the first SD-WAN gateway and before establishing the one or more second communication tunnels, using the SD-WAN router to (i) transmit packets of a client connection over one of the first communication tunnels and (ii) receive packets of a client connection over one of the first communication tunnels; and after establishing the one or more second communication tunnels: maintaining communication over the first set of communication tunnels for existing client connections that started before the one or more second communication tunnels were established; and routing packets over the second communication tunnels for client connections that started after the one or more second communication tunnels were established.
However, Sherman teaches comprising:
after establishing the one or more first communication tunnels with the first SD-WAN gateway and before establishing the one or more second communication tunnels, using the SD-WAN router to (i) transmit packets of a client connection over one of the first communication tunnels and (ii) receive packets of a client connection over one of the first communication tunnels; and after establishing the one or more second communication tunnels: maintaining communication over the first set of communication tunnels for existing client connections that started before the one or more second communication tunnels were established; and routing packets over the second communication tunnels for client connections that started after the one or more second communication tunnels were established (Sherman, Fig. 5-6, Column 30, line 48-Column 32, line 32; the base station encapsulates the data in a GTP tunnel to the mobile station when it registers to the mobile relay network APN where the destination address is of the gateway P/S-GW that was assigned to mobile station. The gateway redirects the tunneled packet to another gateway in a second GTP tunnel and forwards the IP traffic to the router again).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Sherman in order to enable multi-hop tunneling capability without impacting the mobile stations (Sherman, Column 33, lines 4-16).
Claims 6-8 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Legg et al. (US 2021/0185493 A1), hereafter referred Legg.
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the terminal of claim 12 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach wherein detecting that the modem has changed its association comprises obtaining information from the modem using a signaling method between the terminal and the modem, and evaluating the information to detect when the modem's associated ATG gateway has changed.
However, Legg teaches wherein detecting that the modem has changed its association comprises obtaining information from the modem using a signaling method between the terminal and the modem, and evaluating the information to detect when the modem's associated ATG gateway has changed (Legg, Fig. 1-2, [0047]-[0062]; the mobility anchor may provide a common node for all connections and communication paths from the correspondent node to the end node and perform mobility management including keeping track of which access points the wireless modems are currently connected to and updating the routing path accordingly when conditions change. When the train moves and the individual modems dynamically switch/handover to different access points, the mobility anchor will register the resulting changes and update the communication path for the individual connection).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Legg in order to support communication with fast moving vehicles (Legg, [0008]).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the terminal of claim 12 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach wherein detecting that the modem has changed its association comprises detecting when one or more connections carried by the modem have changed to a different anchor point in a network of a wireless service provider.
However, Legg teaches wherein detecting that the modem has changed its association comprises detecting when one or more connections carried by the modem have changed to a different anchor point in a network of a wireless service provider (Legg, Fig. 1-2, [0047]-[0062]; the mobility anchor returns a set of IP addresses to the mobile access gateway and the mobile access gateway and AP establish a bi-directional tunnel to carry traffic to and from the modem, where the modem chooses an IP address to use for the source IP address which may change with the different APs).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Legg in order to support communication with fast moving vehicles (Legg, [0008]).
Regarding claims 8 and 19, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the terminal of claim 12 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach comprising detecting a change in anchor point for one or more connections based on a change of source IP address in the one or more connections carried by the modem in the direction of transmission from the terminal to a SD-WAN gateway.
However, Legg teaches comprising detecting a change in anchor point for one or more connections based on a change of source IP address in the one or more connections carried by the modem in the direction of transmission from the terminal to a SD-WAN gateway (Legg, Fig. 1-2, [0047]-[0062]; the mobility anchor returns a set of IP addresses to the mobile access gateway and the mobile access gateway and AP establish a bi-directional tunnel to carry traffic to and from the modem, where the modem chooses an IP address to use for the source IP address which may change with the different APs).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Legg in order to support communication with fast moving vehicles (Legg, [0008]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Swain (US 2023/0216894 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach wherein selecting the second SD-WAN gateway from the set of multiple SD-WAN gateways based on the relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway comprises: selecting, from a set of multiple SD-WAN gateway locations, a second SD-WAN gateway location that has a shortest geographical distance to the location of the second ATG gateway.
However, Swain teaches wherein selecting the second SD-WAN gateway from the set of multiple SD-WAN gateways based on the relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway comprises: selecting, from a set of multiple SD-WAN gateway locations, a second SD-WAN gateway location that has a shortest geographical distance to the location of the second ATG gateway (Swain, [0028]; the client may establish a connection with the nearest (e.g. geographically closest) gateway service point of presence, where the gateway service point of presences may establish a tunnel from the client for communications).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Swain in order to establish a connection according to routing logic (Swain, [0030]).
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Mo (US 2021/0105869 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant does not expressly teach wherein selecting the second SD-WAN gateway from the set of multiple SD-WAN gateways based on the relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway comprises: selecting, from a set of multiple SD-WAN gateway locations, a second SD-WAN gateway location that has a lowest latency for communication with the terminal.
However, Mo teaches wherein selecting the second SD-WAN gateway from the set of multiple SD-WAN gateways based on the relationship between the second ATG gateway and the second SD-WAN gateway comprises: selecting, from a set of multiple SD-WAN gateway locations, a second SD-WAN gateway location that has a lowest latency for communication with the terminal (Mo, [0176]-[0180] and [0289]; the router may request the WiFi DM to ping a connected device to determine the local latency performance, which may be used to determine operation of the gateway including connectivity. The latency performance includes parameters to determine the best to connection with, such as overall available bandwidth, lowest latency or lowest BER).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Mo in order to provide the requested service request that can be customized to different parameters (Mo, [0030]).
Regarding claim 11, Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant further in view of Mo teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 10 above. Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant further does not expressly teach comprising measuring latency from the terminal to the respective multiple SD-WAN gateway locations by exchanging latency probing messages between the terminal and a server at each of the respective SD-WAN gateway locations.
However, Mo teaches comprising measuring latency from the terminal to the respective multiple SD-WAN gateway locations by exchanging latency probing messages between the terminal and a server at each of the respective SD-WAN gateway locations (Mo, [0176]-[0180] and [0289]; the router may request the WiFi DM to ping a connected device to determine the local latency performance, which may be used to determine operation of the gateway including connectivity. The latency performance includes parameters to determine the best to connection with, such as overall available bandwidth, lowest latency or lowest BER).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Claasen in view of Chiba further in view of Kant to include the above recited limitations as taught by Mo in order to provide the requested service request that can be customized to different parameters (Mo, [0030]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
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 RODRICK MAK whose telephone number is (571)270-0284. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/R.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416
