DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the application filed on May 13, 2026
Claims 1-3, 5-11, 13-19, 21-23 are under examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/13/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-11, 13-19, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GARG et al (US 2016/0277138 A1) in view of Wang et al. (US 2025/0141780 A1).
As per Claim 1 GARG teaches a device, comprising:
a processing system including a processor (Paragraph 0019 device generally includes a processor);
a clock (Paragraph 0005 a master clock); and
a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising (Paragraph 0019 The network device also generally includes a memory coupled to the processor):
a capability as a precision timing protocol (PTP) master clock through an Internet Protocol (IP) network, (Paragraph 0004, 0036, 0050, 0064 capability to synchronize to a master clock and act as a master clock to one or more slave clocks. For example, For example, in one implementation, the PTP node may receive announce messages from the current master PTP node and PTP may be implemented over various packet transports, for example, such as internet protocol (IP) version 4 (IPv4), IPv6, multi-protocol label switching (MPLS), etc.),
receiving a unicast signaling mechanism from a PTP client node in the network (Paragraph 0005, 0018, 0020 where the PTP node participates in an exchange of one or more messages with a current master node ); and sending clock messages to the PTP client node responsive to accepting the PTP client node (Paragraph 0020 For example, a PTP slave and PTP master may exchange various signaling messages (e.g., announce-request, announce-grant, sync-request, sync-grant, etc.) that may allow for a PTP session to be established between the PTP slave and master ).
However GARG does not explicitly disclose wherein the advertising includes an IP address of the device advertising via an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP)
Wang disclose wherein the advertising includes an IP address of the device advertising via an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) (Paragraph 0027, 0093 Examples of link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS) “ISIS can advertise a new link state protocol (LSP)”, IGP, routing in fat trees (RIFT) protocol, or the like. Leaf node T1 may use the link state protocol to calculate next-next-hop information and/or to advertise link quality.. For example, the input component 440 may include a touch screen, a keyboard, a keypad, a mouse, a button, a microphone, a switch, a sensor, a global positioning system sensor, a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) sensor, an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and/or an actuator ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify GARG with the teachings of Wang in order to the make the system more efficient so link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS), IGP, routing.. (see Wang Paragraph 0027).
As per Claim 2 GARG-Wang teaches the device of claim 1, wherein the device further comprises a receiver configured to receive time information from a time source and wherein the operations further comprise synchronizing the clock to the time source (Paragraph 0005, 0018, 0020 For example, the PTP node may perform clock synchronization based on a timestamp received from a current master PTP node and also serves as a master node to at least one connected PTP node that performs clock synchronization based on a timestamp received from the PTP node. ).
As per Claim 3 GARG-Wang teaches the device of claim 2, receiver However GARG does not explicitly disclose wherein the receiver is a Global Navigation Satellite Service.
Wang disclose wherein the receiver is a Global Navigation Satellite Service Wang (Paragraph 0027, 0093 Examples of link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS) “ISIS can advertise a new link state protocol (LSP)”, IGP, routing in fat trees (RIFT) protocol, or the like. Leaf node T1 may use the link state protocol to calculate next-next-hop information and/or to advertise link quality.. For example, the input component 440 may include a touch screen, a keyboard, a keypad, a mouse, a button, a microphone, a switch, a sensor, a global positioning system sensor, a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) sensor, an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and/or an actuator ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify GARG with the teachings of Wang in order to the make the system more efficient so link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS), IGP, routing.. (see Wang Paragraph 0027).
4. (Canceled)
As per Claim 5 GARG-Wang teaches the device of claim 4, wherein the IGP is an Intermediate System to Intermediate System (ISIS) (Paragraph 0026, 0030, For example, as shown, the one or more protocols may include label distribution protocol (LDP), and one or more gateway protocols, such as interior gateway protocol (IGP) and labeled border gateway protocol (BGP). LDP, in general, may be used for the exchange of label mapping information (between the CSGs 212) associated with MPLS. Each of these networks may include a plurality of intermediate network devices (e.g., switches, routers, etc.) that may be used for forwarding and routing traffic in and/or between the networks.).
As per Claim 6 GARG-Wang teaches the device of claim 5, However GARG does not explicitly disclose wherein the advertising uses a new link state protocol (LSP) data unit
(Paragraph 0027, 0093 Examples of link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS) “ISIS can advertise a new link state protocol (LSP)”, IGP, routing in fat trees (RIFT) protocol, or the like. Leaf node T1 may use the link state protocol to calculate next-next-hop information and/or to advertise link quality.. For example, the input component 440 may include a touch screen, a keyboard, a keypad, a mouse, a button, a microphone, a switch, a sensor, a global positioning system sensor, a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) sensor, an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and/or an actuator ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify GARG with the teachings of Wang in order to the make the system more efficient so link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS), IGP, routing.. (see Wang Paragraph 0027).
As per Claim 7 GARG-Wang teaches the device of claim 4, wherein the IGP is an Open Shortest Path First (Paragraph 0030 For example, as shown, the one or more protocols may include label distribution protocol (LDP), and one or more gateway protocols, such as interior gateway protocol (IGP) and labeled border gateway protocol (BGP). LDP, in general, may be used for the exchange of label mapping information (between the CSGs 212) associated with MPLS. IGP, in general, may be used for the exchange of routing information between the CSGs 212. Some examples of IGP protocols include Open Shortest Path First (OSPF).
As per Claim 8 GARG-Wang teaches the device of claim 7, However GARG does not explicitly disclose wherein the advertising message uses an opaque Link State Advertisement (LSA)
Wang disclose wherein the advertising message uses an opaque Link State Advertisement (LSA) (Paragraph 0027, 0093 Examples of link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS) “ISIS can advertise a new link state protocol (LSP)”, IGP, routing in fat trees (RIFT) protocol, or the like. Leaf node T1 may use the link state protocol to calculate next-next-hop information and/or to advertise link quality.. For example, the input component 440 may include a touch screen, a keyboard, a keypad, a mouse, a button, a microphone, a switch, a sensor, a global positioning system sensor, a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) sensor, an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and/or an actuator ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify GARG with the teachings of Wang in order to the make the system more efficient so link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS), IGP, routing.. (see Wang Paragraph 0027).
As per Claim 9 GARG-Wang teaches the device of claim 8, wherein the advertising stays within an OSPF area of the device (Paragraph 0030 For example, as shown, the one or more protocols may include label distribution protocol (LDP), and one or more gateway protocols, such as interior gateway protocol (IGP) and labeled border gateway protocol (BGP). LDP, in general, may be used for the exchange of label mapping information (between the CSGs 212) associated with MPLS. IGP, in general, may be used for the exchange of routing information between the CSGs 212. Some examples of IGP protocols include Open Shortest Path First (OSPF).
As per Claim 21 GARG-Wang teaches the device of claim 1, However Wang disclose wherein the advertising comprises a sub-TLV in an IP reachability extension, the sub-TLV including a PTP role flag indicating whether the device has a PTP master role (Paragraph 0027, 0093 Examples of link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS) “ISIS can advertise a new link state protocol (LSP)”, IGP, routing in fat trees (RIFT) protocol, or the like. Leaf node T1 may use the link state protocol to calculate next-next-hop information and/or to advertise link quality.. For example, the input component 440 may include a touch screen, a keyboard, a keypad, a mouse, a button, a microphone, a switch, a sensor, a global positioning system sensor, a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) sensor, an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and/or an actuator ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify GARG with the teachings of Wang in order to the make the system more efficient so link state protocols (LSP) may include open shortest path first (OSFP), intermediate system to intermediate system (IS-IS), IGP, routing.. (see Wang Paragraph 0027).
Claims 10, 11, 13-19, 22 and 23 are the device and apparatus claims corresponding to the device claims 1-3 and 5-9 that have been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-9. Claims 10, 11, 13-19, 22 and 23 are rejected under the same rational as claims 1-3 and 5-9.
Response to Argument(s)
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Response to Argument(s)
Examiner’s Note
Examiner is open for discussion if the applicant’s representative need further clarifications.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL
Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED ALI whose telephone number is (571)270-3681. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Asad Nawaz can be reached on 571-272-3988. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov . 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.
/SYED ALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights