DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to the application 18/412,207 filed on January 12, 2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
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
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,265,239 and Claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent 11,916,778. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the Instant application are obvious variations of the claims of the Patent. The table below shows only Example (sample) of Claims which are anticipated by of US 11,265,239 and US 11,916,778.
Present Claims
US 11,265,239
US 11,916,778
1. A method comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission; reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
1. A method comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes by closing a first root port for the first traffic path at a root node for the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the plurality of extended network nodes use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission, wherein the plurality of extended network nodes use the first alternate traffic path via a second root port at the root node; configuring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes to define a second traffic path in a second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes by: reconfiguring a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration, wherein the first port is at first extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the first extended network node is first hop proximate to the root node; and reconfiguring at each next subsequent extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
1. A method comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission; reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes by: reconfiguring a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration, wherein the first port is at first extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the first extended network node is first hop proximate to the root node; and reconfiguring at each next subsequent extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
8. A system comprising: a processor; and a memory comprising instructions which, when executed on the processor, performs an operation, the operation comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission; reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
6. A system comprising: a processor; and a memory comprising instructions which, when executed on the processor, performs an operation, the operation comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes by closing a first root port for the first traffic path at a root node for the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the plurality of extended network nodes use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission, wherein the plurality of extended network nodes use the first alternate traffic path via a second root port at the root node; configuring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes to define a second traffic path in a second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes by: reconfiguring a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration, wherein the first port is at first extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the first extended network node is first hop proximate to the root node; and reconfiguring at each next subsequent extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
7. A system comprising: a processor; and a memory comprising instructions which, when executed on the processor, performs an operation, the operation comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission; reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes by: reconfiguring a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration, wherein the first port is at first extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the first extended network node is first hop proximate to the root node; and reconfiguring at each next subsequent extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
15. A computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium program having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a processor to perform an operation comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission; reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
11. A computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium program having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a processor to perform an operation comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes by closing a first root port for the first traffic path at a root node for the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the plurality of extended network nodes use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission, wherein the plurality of extended network nodes use the first alternate traffic path via a second root port at the root node; configuring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes to define a second traffic path in a second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes by: reconfiguring a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration, wherein the first port is at first extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the first extended network node is first hop proximate to the root node; and reconfiguring at each next subsequent extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
13. A computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium program having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a processor to perform an operation comprising: closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission; reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes by: reconfiguring a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration, wherein the first port is at first extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the first extended network node is first hop proximate to the root node; and reconfiguring at each next subsequent extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration; closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
Regarding Claims 1-20, Claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,265,239 and Claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent 11,916,778 disclose all the limitations of Claims 1-20 by eliminating limitations. It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex Parte Raine, 186 USPQ 375 (bd. App. 1969); omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would have been obvious to one skilled in the art.
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.
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 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.
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.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Madaih et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2013/0343179, hereinafter Madaih, in view of Sunharshan et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0063617, hereinafter Sunharshan.
Regarding Claim 1, Madaih discloses a method (Abstract; Figure 1 and 7; Paragraph [0056-0061]) comprising:
closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission (Paragraph [0008-0011] identifying a fault in the network, blocking ports of the communication device in response to the detection of fault broadcasting RAPS (Fault) message by the blocked ports of the communicator devices. and unblocking of a root port link of the linear chain or toggling of the port on the communication device attached to the linear chain, for providing an alternate path to route network traffic after receipt of the RAPS (Fault) message; Paragraph [0041] Protection of path in which upon receipt of a fault happening between a plurality of extended network nodes a path is closed and ports configured to routing to a first alternate traffic path);
reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes (Paragraph [0033-0041] Configuration of different sets of ports in which in normal operation some ports are blocked and some unblocked; In response to a fault between different nodes including different ports, ports are configured to provide an alternate path protecting the operation of layer-2 or layer 3 traffic depending on where the fault occurs).
Madaih discloses a method and system is described in which a protection switching prevents loops in a layer-2 and layer-3 ring network in which in response to faults link paths may be closed and rerouted but fails to explicitly disclose closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
However, Sunharshan more specifically teaches closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission (Paragraph [0017-0018] In order to prevent a network storm, an Ethernet network may use a protocol to disable links between particular network elements in order to ensure a loop-free network topology. The loop-breaking protocol may block a port at one or more network elements to disable one or more network links between network elements so that data packets are not forwarded across the disabled links. Preventing the flow of data packets on particular links may disable loops in the network and prevent a network storm from occurring.
In addition to disabling network loops, the loop-breaking protocol may also assist in maintaining a connected network in the event of a network failure. For example, the loop-breaking protocol may enable a disabled network link (e.g., by unblocking a previously blocked port) if another network link or network element unexpectedly fails. Thus, the loop-breaking protocol may prevent network loops and help restore network connectivity in the event of a network failure; That is Sunharshan teaches reconfiguring of links in response to unexpected failing or faults of another network link or network element, In which a new path will be creating unblocking some previous links and blocking other links to prevent network loops and restore network connectivity in event of a network failure);
and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration (Paragraph [0033-0038] Configuring of a new set of ports to prevent against network loops in which a port previously shut down to protect against network loops during migration may be re-opened to network traffic. Despite being enabled, port 204-1 may still remain blocked to network traffic by the ERPS protocol. in the event of a network failure, ERPS protocol may unblock 204-1 to maintain connectivity among the network elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Madaih with the teachings of Sunharshan. Sunharshan provides a solution in which ethernet ring protection switching (ERPS) protocol can be optimized for networks that are configured in a ring topology. The loop-breaking protocol can prevent network loops and help restore network connectivity in the event of a network failure. The port is previously shut down to protect against network loops during migration can be re-opened to network traffic (Sunharshan Abstract; Paragraph [0002-0008 and 0018-0019]).
Regarding Claim 7, Madaih in view of Sunharshan disclose the method of Claim 1. Madaih in view of Sunharshan further disclose wherein closing the first traffic path and closing the first alternate traffic path during network reconfiguration prevents network traffic looping in the plurality of extended network nodes (Sunharshan Paragraph [0018] In order to prevent a network storm, an Ethernet network may use a loop-breaking protocol, such as spanning tree protocol (e.g., spanning tree protocol, rapid spanning tree protocol, and multiple spanning tree protocol) or Ethernet ring protection switching (ERPS) protocol (e.g., G.8032), to disable links between particular network elements in order to ensure a loop-free network topology. The loop-breaking protocol may block a port at one or more network elements to disable one or more network links between network elements so that data packets are not forwarded across the disabled links. Preventing the flow of data packets on particular links may disable loops in the network and prevent a network storm from occurring. In addition to disabling network loops, the loop-breaking protocol may also assist in maintaining a connected network in the event of a network failure).
Regarding Claim 8, Madaih discloses a system comprising: a processor; and a memory comprising instructions which, when executed on the processor (Abstract; Figure 1 and 7; Paragraph [0056-0061]), performs an operation, the operation comprising:
closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission (Paragraph [0008-0011] identifying a fault in the network, blocking ports of the communication device in response to the detection of fault broadcasting RAPS (Fault) message by the blocked ports of the communicator devices. and unblocking of a root port link of the linear chain or toggling of the port on the communication device attached to the linear chain, for providing an alternate path to route network traffic after receipt of the RAPS (Fault) message; Paragraph [0041] Protection of path in which upon receipt of a fault happening between a plurality of extended network nodes a path is closed and ports configured to routing to a first alternate traffic path);
reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes (Paragraph [0033-0041] Configuration of different sets of ports in which in normal operation some ports are blocked and some unblocked; In response to a fault between different nodes including different ports, ports are configured to provide an alternate path protecting the operation of layer-2 or layer 3 traffic depending on where the fault occurs).
Madaih discloses a method and system is described in which a protection switching prevents loops in a layer-2 and layer-3 ring network in which in response to faults link paths may be closed and rerouted but fails to explicitly disclose closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration.
However, Sunharshan more specifically teaches closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission(Paragraph [0017-0018] In order to prevent a network storm, an Ethernet network may use a protocol to disable links between particular network elements in order to ensure a loop-free network topology. The loop-breaking protocol may block a port at one or more network elements to disable one or more network links between network elements so that data packets are not forwarded across the disabled links. Preventing the flow of data packets on particular links may disable loops in the network and prevent a network storm from occurring.
In addition to disabling network loops, the loop-breaking protocol may also assist in maintaining a connected network in the event of a network failure. For example, the loop-breaking protocol may enable a disabled network link (e.g., by unblocking a previously blocked port) if another network link or network element unexpectedly fails. Thus, the loop-breaking protocol may prevent network loops and help restore network connectivity in the event of a network failure; That is Sunharshan teaches reconfiguring of links in response to unexpected failing or faults of another network link or network element, In which a new path will be creating unblocking some previous links and blocking other links to prevent network loops and restore network connectivity in event of a network failure);
and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration (Paragraph [0033-0038] Configuring of a new set of ports to prevent against network loops in which a port previously shut down to protect against network loops during migration may be re-opened to network traffic. Despite being enabled, port 204-1 may still remain blocked to network traffic by the ERPS protocol. in the event of a network failure, ERPS protocol may unblock 204-1 to maintain connectivity among the network elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Madaih with the teachings of Sunharshan. Sunharshan provides a solution in which ethernet ring protection switching (ERPS) protocol can be optimized for networks that are configured in a ring topology. The loop-breaking protocol can prevent network loops and help restore network connectivity in the event of a network failure. The port is previously shut down to protect against network loops during migration can be re-opened to network traffic (Sunharshan Abstract; Paragraph [0002-0008 and 0018-0019]).
Regarding Claim 14, Madaih in view of Sunharshan disclose the system of Claim 8. Madaih in view of Sunharshan further disclose wherein closing the first traffic path and closing the first alternate traffic path during network reconfiguration prevents network traffic looping in the plurality of extended network nodes (Sunharshan Paragraph [0018] In order to prevent a network storm, an Ethernet network may use a loop-breaking protocol, such as spanning tree protocol (e.g., spanning tree protocol, rapid spanning tree protocol, and multiple spanning tree protocol) or Ethernet ring protection switching (ERPS) protocol (e.g., G.8032), to disable links between particular network elements in order to ensure a loop-free network topology. The loop-breaking protocol may block a port at one or more network elements to disable one or more network links between network elements so that data packets are not forwarded across the disabled links. Preventing the flow of data packets on particular links may disable loops in the network and prevent a network storm from occurring. In addition to disabling network loops, the loop-breaking protocol may also assist in maintaining a connected network in the event of a network failure).
Regarding Claim 15, Madaih discloses a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium program having program instructions embodied therewith (Abstract; Figure 1 and 7; Paragraph [0056-0061]), the program instructions executable by a processor to perform an operation comprising:
closing a first traffic path in a first network configuration for a plurality of extended network nodes to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use a first alternate traffic path for data traffic transmission (Paragraph [0008-0011] identifying a fault in the network, blocking ports of the communication device in response to the detection of fault broadcasting RAPS (Fault) message by the blocked ports of the communicator devices. and unblocking of a root port link of the linear chain or toggling of the port on the communication device attached to the linear chain, for providing an alternate path to route network traffic after receipt of the RAPS (Fault) message; Paragraph [0041] Protection of path in which upon receipt of a fault happening between a plurality of extended network nodes a path is closed and ports configured to routing to a first alternate traffic path);
reconfiguring a first set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes from the first network configuration to a second network configuration to define a second traffic path in the second network configuration for the plurality of extended network nodes (Paragraph [0033-0041] Configuration of different sets of ports in which in normal operation some ports are blocked and some unblocked; In response to a fault between different nodes including different ports, ports are configured to provide an alternate path protecting the operation of layer-2 or layer 3 traffic depending on where the fault occurs).
Madaih discloses a method and system is described in which a protection switching prevents loops in a layer-2 and layer-3 ring network in which in response to faults link paths may be closed and rerouted but fails to explicitly disclose closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission ; and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration
However, Sunharshan more specifically teaches closing the first alternate traffic path to cause the plurality of extended network nodes to use the second traffic path in the second network configuration for the data traffic transmission (Paragraph [0017-0018] In order to prevent a network storm, an Ethernet network may use a protocol to disable links between particular network elements in order to ensure a loop-free network topology. The loop-breaking protocol may block a port at one or more network elements to disable one or more network links between network elements so that data packets are not forwarded across the disabled links. Preventing the flow of data packets on particular links may disable loops in the network and prevent a network storm from occurring.
In addition to disabling network loops, the loop-breaking protocol may also assist in maintaining a connected network in the event of a network failure. For example, the loop-breaking protocol may enable a disabled network link (e.g., by unblocking a previously blocked port) if another network link or network element unexpectedly fails. Thus, the loop-breaking protocol may prevent network loops and help restore network connectivity in the event of a network failure; That is Sunharshan teaches reconfiguring of links in response to unexpected failing or faults of another network link or network element, In which a new path will be creating unblocking some previous links and blocking other links to prevent network loops and restore network connectivity in event of a network failure);
and configuring a second set of ports in the plurality of extended network nodes in the first network configuration into the second network configuration (Paragraph [0033-0038] Configuring of a new set of ports to prevent against network loops in which a port previously shut down to protect against network loops during migration may be re-opened to network traffic. Despite being enabled, port 204-1 may still remain blocked to network traffic by the ERPS protocol. in the event of a network failure, ERPS protocol may unblock 204-1 to maintain connectivity among the network elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Madaih with the teachings of Sunharshan. Sunharshan provides a solution in which ethernet ring protection switching (ERPS) protocol can be optimized for networks that are configured in a ring topology. The loop-breaking protocol can prevent network loops and help restore network connectivity in the event of a network failure. The port is previously shut down to protect against network loops during migration can be re-opened to network traffic (Sunharshan Abstract; Paragraph [0002-0008 and 0018-0019]).
Claims 2, 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Madaih in view of Sunharshan as applied to claim 1, 8 and 15 above, and further in view of Kumar C S U.S. Patent 9,059,901, hereinafter Kumar.
Regarding Claim 2, 9 and 16, Madaih in view of Sunharshan disclose the method, system and computer program product of Claim 1, 8 and 15. Madaih in view of Sunharshan disclose closing of ports at root nodes but fail to explicitly disclose wherein closing the first traffic path comprises: closing a first root port for the first traffic path at a root node for the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the plurality of extended network nodes use the first alternate traffic path via a second root port at the root node.
However, Kumar more specifically teaches wherein closing the first traffic path comprises: closing a first root port for the first traffic path at a root node for the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the plurality of extended network nodes use the first alternate traffic path via a second root port at the root node (Column 10 [Line 22 – Line 64] a topology of a switched network can be changed due to various reasons such as, for example, an error occurs at a root port or a designated port at an access switch; a new data path between an access switch and a destination device becomes active; a new port at an access switch is activated that has a better cost to a destination device; a link between two devices is down; and/or the like. In such embodiments, a spanning tree protocol can be re-run in the switched network and new root ports and/or designated ports can be determined after convergence of the STP; That is a new alternate path is created through s second new root port).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Madaih in view of Sunharshan with the teachings of Kumar. Kumar provides a solution which allows a loop-free topology to be discovered and ensured for a switched network by executing a network protocol in the switched network in an efficient manner (Kumar Abstract; Column 1 and Column 6 [Line 35-51]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 10-13 and 17-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 3, 10 and 17, the prior art of record fail to disclose alone or in any reasonable combination as required by the dependent claims, “wherein configuring the first set of ports in the plurality of extended network comprises: reconfiguring a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration, wherein the first port is at first extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes, wherein the first extended network node is first hop proximate to the root node; and reconfiguring at each next subsequent extended network node of the plurality of extended network nodes a first port from the first network configuration to the second network configuration.”
The Examiner notes the above limitation(s) are not taken alone but in view of the entirety of the claim language including any preceding claim limitations, any proceeding claim limitations, and any intervening claim limitations.
Claims 4-6, 11-13 and 18-20 would also be allowable since they depend upon indicated base claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IVAN O LATORRE whose telephone number is (571)272-6264. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at (571) 270-3618. 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.
IVAN O. LATORRE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2409
/IVAN O LATORRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409