DETAILED ACTION
Claim(s) 1-20 are presented for examination.
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 .
Priority
As required by M.P.E.P.201.14(c), acknowledgement is made to applicant’s claim for priority based on application(s) 63/479,129 submitted on January 9th, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on August 13th, 2024 follow the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains a legal phraseology “comprising …” in line 2. The form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as "means" and "said," should be avoided. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2019/0140884 A1) hereinafter “Liu” in view of Da Silva et al. (US 2022/0014921 A1) hereinafter “Da Silva”.
Regarding Claims 1 and 14,
Liu discloses an apparatus for controlling access to a shared resource on a distributed network [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, a schematic structural diagram of a multicast delay diagnosis apparatus or terminal device], comprising:
one or more memories storing instructions [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, at least one memory storing a group of program code]; and
one or more processors communicatively coupled with the one or more memories and [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, at least one processor such as a CPU], individually or in combination [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, at least one network interface], configured to execute the instructions [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, implementing the stored program code] to:
transmit a first multicast request packet to a plurality of hosts to request access to the shared resource [see fig. 4: Step “403”, pg. 3, ¶33 lines 1-4, the terminal device sends a first multicast test join request to the network node by using the first multicast test address, and records a time point for sending the first multicast test join request];
set a first timer for a first predetermined period of time after transmitting the first multicast request packet [see fig. 4: Step “404”, pg. 3, ¶35 lines 1-3, the terminal device receives a first packet returned by the network node, and records a time point for receiving the first packet];
verify that the shared resource is accessible [see fig. 4: Step “405”, pg. 4, ¶38 lines 1-5, the terminal device calculates], in response to determining that [see fig. 4: Step “405”, pg. 4, ¶38 lines 1-5, according to], during the first predetermined period of time [see fig. 4: Step “405”, pg. 4, ¶38 lines 1-5, the time point for sending the first multicast test join request and the time point for receiving the first packet], no multicast packets related to access to the shared resource have been received [see fig. 4: Step “405”, pg. 4, ¶38 lines 1-5, a first delay caused when the terminal device joins a multicast group of the network node]; and
perform one or more operations on the shared resource [see fig. 4: Step “406”, pg. 4, ¶40 lines 1-2, the terminal device determines multicast network quality according to the first delay].
Although Liu discloses performing one or more operations on the shared resource, Liu does not explicitly teach the one or more operations performed “in response to verifying that the shared resource is accessible”.
However Da Silva discloses a method for controlling access to a shared resource on a distributed network [see fig. 15, pg. 16, ¶344 lines 1-5, an exemplary method and/or procedure for reporting failures that occur during communication with a first cell associated with a first network node], comprising:
transmitting a first multicast request packet to a plurality of hosts to request access to the shared resource [see fig. 15: Step “1520”, pg. 16, ¶345 lines 1-6, the UE transmits a request message to the first network node, wherein the request message is associated with a connection between the UE and a radio access network (RAN)];
setting a first timer for a first predetermined period of time after transmitting the first multicast request packet [see fig. 15: Step “1530”, pg. 17, ¶345 lines 1-2, the UE initiates a timer upon transmitting the request message];
verifying that the shared resource is accessible [see fig. 15: Step(s) “1540”-“1542”, pg. 17, ¶347 lines 1-7, the UE performs integrity protection (IP) verification], in response to determining that [see fig. 15: Step(s) “1540”-“1542”, pg. 17, ¶347 lines 1-7, of a response to the request message], during the first predetermined period of time [see fig. 15: Step(s) “1540”-“1542”, pg. 17, ¶347 lines 1-7, involving initiating the timer], no multicast packets related to access to the shared resource have been received [see fig. 15: Step(s) “1540”-“1542”, pg. 17, ¶347 lines 1-7; ¶348 lines 1-9, the lack of a match indicating failure of the IP verification]; and
performing one or more operations on the shared resource [see fig. 15: Step “1550”, pg. 17, ¶349 lines 1-7, the UE performs the following operations: transitioning to an idle state; selecting a second cell associated with the second network node; and establishing a connection to the RAN via the second cell], in response to verifying that the shared resource is accessible [see fig. 15: Step “1550”, pg. 17, ¶349 lines 1-7, in response to the failure of the IP verification].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the one or more operations performed “in response to verifying that the shared resource is accessible” as taught by Da Silva in the system of Liu for providing flexible and efficient techniques of reporting and processing integrity protection failures and facilitate identification of fake base stations and/or other failure causes [see Da Silva, pg. 3, ¶27 lines 1-6].
Regarding Claims 2, 3 and 15,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the apparatus of claim 14.
Liu further discloses wherein the first multicast request packet includes at least an identifier of the shared resource [see pg. 3, ¶34 lines 1-20, the packet carries an IPv4 address or an IPv4 address of the terminal device, and from top to bottom, the packet is sequentially used to fill a packet header, an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address, and a reserved bit], wherein to transmit the first multicast request packet, the one or more processors, individually or in combination, are further configured to execute the instructions to transmit the first multicast request packet using user datagram protocol (UDP) [see pg. 3, ¶34 lines 1-20, after receiving the first multicast test join request, the network node returns a UDP (User Datagram Protocol, user datagram protocol) packet].
Regarding Claims 4 and 16,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the apparatus of claim 14.
Liu further discloses wherein the one or more processors, individually or in combination, are further configured to execute the instructions [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, the at least one processor such as the CPU implementing the stored program code] to:
set a second timer for a random period of time [see fig. 4: Step “404”, pg. 3, ¶35 lines 1-3, the terminal device … records a time point for receiving the first packet], in response to receiving a second multicast request packet during the first predetermined period of time [see fig. 4: Step “404”, pg. 3, ¶35 lines 1-3, upon receiving a first packet returned by the network node]; and
retransmit the first multicast request packet upon expiration of the random period of time [see fig. 4: Step “404”, pg. 3, ¶36 lines 1-6, after receiving the packet returned by the network node, the terminal device sends a multicast test leaving request to the network node by using the first multicast test address].
Regarding Claims 5, 6 and 17,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the apparatus of claim 16.
Liu further discloses wherein the second multicast request packet includes at least an identifier of the shared resource [see pg. 3, ¶34 lines 1-20, the packet carries an IPv4 address or an IPv4 address of the terminal device, and from top to bottom, the packet is sequentially used to fill a packet header, an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address, and a reserved bit], wherein the second multicast request packet is transmitted using user datagram protocol (UDP) [see pg. 3, ¶34 lines 1-20, after receiving the first multicast test join request, the network node returns a UDP (User Datagram Protocol, user datagram protocol) packet].
Regarding Claims 7 and 18,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the apparatus of claim 14.
Liu further discloses wherein the one or more processors, individually or in combination, are further configured to execute the instructions [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, the at least one processor such as the CPU implementing the stored program code] to:
set a third timer for a fixed period of time [see fig. 4: Step “404”, pg. 3, ¶35 lines 1-3, the terminal device … records a time point for receiving the first packet], in response to receiving a multicast denial packet during the first predetermined period of time [see fig. 4: Step “404”, pg. 3, ¶35 lines 1-3, upon receiving a first packet returned by the network node]; and
retransmit the first multicast request packet upon expiration of the fixed period of time [see fig. 4: Step “404”, pg. 3, ¶36 lines 1-6, after receiving the packet returned by the network node, the terminal device sends a multicast test leaving request to the network node by using the first multicast test address].
Regarding Claim 8,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the method of claim 7.
Liu further discloses wherein the multicast denial packet includes at least an identifier of the shared resource [see pg. 3, ¶34 lines 1-20, the packet carries an IPv4 address or an IPv4 address of the terminal device, and from top to bottom, the packet is sequentially used to fill a packet header, an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address, and a reserved bit].
Regarding Claim 9,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the method of claim 7.
Liu further discloses wherein the multicast denial packet is transmitted using user datagram protocol (UDP) [see pg. 3, ¶34 lines 1-20, after receiving the first multicast test join request, the network node returns a UDP (User Datagram Protocol, user datagram protocol) packet].
Regarding Claim 11,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the method of claim 10.
Liu further discloses wherein the multicast denial packet include at least an identifier of the shared resource [see pg. 3, ¶34 lines 1-20, the packet carries an IPv4 address or an IPv4 address of the terminal device, and from top to bottom, the packet is sequentially used to fill a packet header, an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address, and a reserved bit].
Regarding Claim 12,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the method of claim 10.
Liu further discloses wherein transmitting the first multicast request packet and the multicast denial packet comprises transmitting the first multicast request packet and the multicast denial packet using user datagram protocol (UDP) [see pg. 3, ¶34 lines 1-20, after receiving the first multicast test join request, the network node returns a UDP (User Datagram Protocol, user datagram protocol) packet].
Regarding Claim 13,
The combined system of Liu and Da Silva discloses the method of claim 1.
Liu further discloses wherein the one or more operations include of updating a value of the shared resource [see pg. 4, ¶39 lines 1-9, the time point for sending the first multicast test join request is subtracted from the time point for receiving the first packet, so that the first delay caused when the terminal device joins the multicast group of the network node is obtained].
Regarding Claim 20,
Liu discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media having instructions stored thereon for controlling access to a shared resource on a distributed network [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, at least one memory storing a group of program code], wherein the instructions are executable by one or more processors [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, at least one processor such as a CPU], individually or in combination [see fig. 7, pg. 5, ¶66 lines 1-6, implementing the stored program code], to:
transmit a first multicast request packet to a plurality of hosts to request access to the shared resource [see fig. 4: Step “403”, pg. 3, ¶33 lines 1-4, the terminal device sends a first multicast test join request to the network node by using the first multicast test address, and records a time point for sending the first multicast test join request];
set a first timer for a first predetermined period of time after transmitting the first multicast request packet [see fig. 4: Step “404”, pg. 3, ¶35 lines 1-3, the terminal device receives a first packet returned by the network node, and records a time point for receiving the first packet];
verify that the shared resource is accessible [see fig. 4: Step “405”, pg. 4, ¶38 lines 1-5, the terminal device calculates], in response to determining that [see fig. 4: Step “405”, pg. 4, ¶38 lines 1-5, according to], during the first predetermined period of time [see fig. 4: Step “405”, pg. 4, ¶38 lines 1-5, the time point for sending the first multicast test join request and the time point for receiving the first packet], no multicast packets related to access to the shared resource have been received [see fig. 4: Step “405”, pg. 4, ¶38 lines 1-5, a first delay caused when the terminal device joins a multicast group of the network node]; and
perform one or more operations on the shared resource [see fig. 4: Step “406”, pg. 4, ¶40 lines 1-2, the terminal device determines multicast network quality according to the first delay].
Although Liu discloses performing one or more operations on the shared resource, Liu does not explicitly teach the one or more operations performed “in response to verifying that the shared resource is accessible”.
However Da Silva discloses a method for controlling access to a shared resource on a distributed network [see fig. 15, pg. 16, ¶344 lines 1-5, an exemplary method and/or procedure for reporting failures that occur during communication with a first cell associated with a first network node], comprising:
transmitting a first multicast request packet to a plurality of hosts to request access to the shared resource [see fig. 15: Step “1520”, pg. 16, ¶345 lines 1-6, the UE transmits a request message to the first network node, wherein the request message is associated with a connection between the UE and a radio access network (RAN)];
setting a first timer for a first predetermined period of time after transmitting the first multicast request packet [see fig. 15: Step “1530”, pg. 17, ¶345 lines 1-2, the UE initiates a timer upon transmitting the request message];
verifying that the shared resource is accessible [see fig. 15: Step(s) “1540”-“1542”, pg. 17, ¶347 lines 1-7, the UE performs integrity protection (IP) verification], in response to determining that [see fig. 15: Step(s) “1540”-“1542”, pg. 17, ¶347 lines 1-7, of a response to the request message], during the first predetermined period of time [see fig. 15: Step(s) “1540”-“1542”, pg. 17, ¶347 lines 1-7, involving initiating the timer], no multicast packets related to access to the shared resource have been received [see fig. 15: Step(s) “1540”-“1542”, pg. 17, ¶347 lines 1-7; ¶348 lines 1-9, the lack of a match indicating failure of the IP verification]; and
performing one or more operations on the shared resource [see fig. 15: Step “1550”, pg. 17, ¶349 lines 1-7, the UE performs the following operations: transitioning to an idle state; selecting a second cell associated with the second network node; and establishing a connection to the RAN via the second cell], in response to verifying that the shared resource is accessible [see fig. 15: Step “1550”, pg. 17, ¶349 lines 1-7, in response to the failure of the IP verification].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the one or more operations performed “in response to verifying that the shared resource is accessible” as taught by Da Silva in the system of Liu for providing flexible and efficient techniques of reporting and processing integrity protection failures and facilitate identification of fake base stations and/or other failure causes [see Da Silva, pg. 3, ¶27 lines 1-6].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 19 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
United States Patent Application Publication: ZHANG (US 2020/0220742 A1); see fig. 3, pgs. 2-3, ¶34-¶44.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUSHIL P SAMPAT whose telephone number is (469) 295-9141. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri (8 AM - 5 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, Ian Moore can be reached on (571) 272-3085. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RUSHIL P. SAMPAT/Primary Examiner- TC 2400, Art Unit 2469