Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/19/2025 has been entered.
Detailed Action
3. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Argument
4. Applicant's arguments/ amendment filed on 12/19/2025 have been fully considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AlA 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.
6. 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 of this title, 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.
7. Claim 1,7, 10-11, 14, 16 and 18, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Gupta (US 20120163175 A1) Gupta et al in view of Kwan et al. (US 20090003212 A1) hereinafter Kwan.
Regarding claims 1, 11 and 16, Gupta discloses a switch comprising one or more circuits (see Figs 2-4) to:
determine a rate of change in a number of entries in an ingress queue exceeds a first threshold rate of change (par. [0033] a detecting operation 604 detects a rate of incoming data flow during communications, monitoring the ingress port for incoming data frames. The controller may measure a quantity of the data frames over time to determine the rate of incoming data frames. [0014] the rate limiting network controller 104 may monitor packet traffic incoming from the network 100 to each of the virtual machines 110 via the ingress port 106 and apply a rate limiting function when the rate at which the ingress port receives data traffic for a particular virtual machine exceeds that virtual machine's maximum incoming frame rate (e.g., exceeds a threshold));
Gupta, discloses based on determining the rate of change in the number of entries in the ingress queue exceeds the first threshold ( para. [0020] when the controller 304 detects that the rate of incoming data packets to any one of the virtual machines 309, 310 exceeds the preset maximum frame rate (e.g., an allocated or pre-determined rate threshold) of that virtual machine, the controller 304 may send the unicast congestion message to the source device that is contributing to the overload of the overloaded virtual machine. The unicast congestion message may be sent back through the switches 316, 318, 320 to the source device 314 or any other route through the network 300 that reaches the source device 314. The unicast congestion message instructs the contributing source device 314 to reduce or stop its data packet transmission rate so that the rate of incoming data packets to the overloaded virtual machine decreases).
Gupta may not explicitly discloses dynamically adjust a rate at which packets to be transmitted from the switch an egress queue are processed for egress
However, Kwan discloses dynamically adjust a rate at which packets to be transmitted from the switch an egress queue are processed for egress (para. [0024] the data-switch fabric 206 may send a flow control message to the ingress module_1 202 in place of, or in addition to the flow control message sent to the ingress module_1 204. The flow control message sent to the ingress module_1 202 may instruct the ingress module_1 to stop sending the data flow 220 from a VOQ associated with the egress module_1 210. In another example, the flow control message may instruct the ingress modules to reduce the rate at which the data flows 220 and 224 are transmitted, which may resolve the congestion at the fabric egress port 218 without the need to stop transmission of the data flows [0046] If the fabric egress queue 414 becomes congested, as indicated by the cross-hatched area indicating data occupancy, the fabric element 400 may communicate a flow control message to the ingress module 300 indicating that the data flow being communicated from VOQ 312 is causing congestion in the fabric egress queue 414. In response to the flow control message, the ingress module (e.g., using the scheduler 318) may stop or slow transmission of the data flow from the VOQ 312).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Gupta and include dynamically adjust a rate at which packets to be transmitted from the switch an egress queue are processed for egress using the teaching of Kwan. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to prevent data loss in the fabric elements, hence the data transmission efficiency of the data switch is improved by reducing the head-of-line blocking.
Regarding claims 7, 14 and 18, claim 1 is incorporated. Gupta may not explicitly disclose wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress comprises delaying a scheduling of the packets the egress queues. However, Kwan discloses wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress comprises delaying a scheduling of the packets the egress queues (para. [0046] [0056] If the fabric egress queue 414 becomes congested, as indicated by the cross-hatched area indicating data occupancy, the fabric element 400 may communicate a flow control message to the ingress module 300 indicating that the data flow being communicated from VOQ 312 is causing congestion in the fabric egress queue 414. In response to the flow control message, the ingress module (e.g., using the scheduler 318) may stop or slow transmission of the data flow from the VOQ 312.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Gupta and include wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress comprises delaying a scheduling of the packets the egress queues using the teaching of Kwan. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to prevent data loss in the fabric elements, hence the data transmission efficiency of the data switch is improved by reducing the head-of-line blocking.
Regarding claim 10, claim 1 is incorporated. Gupta further discloses wherein each entry in the ingress queue represents a respective packet of a plurality of packets to be transmitted from the switch (para. [0015] figs 2-4, data packets inbound to the destination device 212 from the source devices 208 are routed through switches 216, 218 before arriving at the ingress 206 of the destination device 212. In addition, Kwan discloses [0049]-[0050] when the data occupancy of the queue 600 exceeds the threshold 602, the data-switch fabric may send a flow control message instructing one or more ingress modules to stop sending data flows from VOQs that are causing the congestion).
8. Claim 2,12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable Gupta in view of Kwan and further in view of Walrand et al. (US 7046665 B1) hereinafter Walrand.
Regarding claims 2, 12 and 19, claim 1 is incorporated. Gupta in view of Kwan disclose threshold of rate change below and above threshold, Kwan (para. [0047]-[0051] and Fig. 6) . Gupta in view of Kwan may not explicitly disclose after dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress, determine the rate of change in the number of entries in the ingress queue is below the first threshold rate of change; and in response to determining the rate of change in the number of entries in the ingress queue is below the first threshold rate of change, cease dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress. However, Walrand discloses after dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress, determine the rate of change in the number of entries in the ingress queue is below the first threshold rate of change; and in response to determining the rate of change in the number of entries in the ingress queue is below the first threshold rate of change, cease dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress (col. 11, lines 9-17, a modified switch monitors the occupancy of its queues. When the queue of a specific data stream is at or exceeds some high threshold, it is marked as congested. The status is reset to "non-congested" when the occupancy of the queue corresponding to the queue falls below low threshold.
The modified switch notifies the upstream node of that stream that the upstream node should slow down or stop the transmissions of packets of that stream.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Gupta in view of Kwan and include after dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress, determine the rate of change in the number of entries in the ingress queue is below the first threshold rate of change; and in response to determining the rate of change in the number of entries in the ingress queue is below the first threshold rate of change, cease dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress using the teaching of Walrand. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide data transmission services with guaranteed quality of service (QoS).
9. Claims 3-4, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Gupta in view of Kwan and further in view of Kwan1 et al. (US 12231342 B1) hereinafter Kwan.
Regarding claims 3, 13 and 20, claim 1 is incorporated. Gupta in view of Kwan discloses threshold of rate change as recited in claim 1 above. Gupta in view of Kwan may not explicitly disclose wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress comprises increasing the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress from a first rate to a second rate over time.. However, Kwan1 discloses wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the switch egress queue are processed for egress comprises increasing the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress from a first rate to a second rate over time. (col 21 lines 26-62, in response to determining that the egress buffer memory 252 has transitioned from congested to not congested, the rate control circuitry 236 controls the ingress portion 204-xa to begin transferring data units corresponding to the ingress source from an ingress queue 228 corresponding to the ingress source to the egress portion 204-xb (via the interconnect 216) at a transfer rate r1, which is approximately ⅓ of a maximum transfer rate that the ingress portion 204-xa and the interconnect 216 are capable of transferring data units to the egress portion 204-1b. Accordingly, at time t1, the ingress portion 204-xa begins transferring data units corresponding to the ingress source from the ingress queue 228 to the egress portion 204-xb (via the interconnect 216) at the transfer rate r1… Next, at a time t3, the rate control circuitry 236 controls the ingress portion 204-xa to begin transferring data units corresponding to the ingress source from the ingress queue 228 to the egress portion 204-xb (via the interconnect 216) at the maximum transfer rate that the ingress portion 204-xa and the interconnect 216 are capable of transferring data units to the egress portion 204-1b. Accordingly, at time t3, the ingress portion 204-xa begins transferring data units corresponding to the ingress source from the ingress queue 228 to the egress portion 204-xb (via the interconnect 216) at the maximum transfer rate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Gupta in view of Kwan and include wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the switch egress queue are processed for egress comprises increasing the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress from a first rate to a second rate over time using the teaching of Kwan1. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to efficiently use buffer memory.
Regarding claim 4, claim 3 is incorporated. Kwan further discloses wherein the second rate is a maximum rate (col 21 lines 26-62 , at a time t3, the rate control circuitry 236 controls the ingress portion 204-xa to begin transferring data units corresponding to the ingress source from the ingress queue 228 to the egress portion 204-xb (via the interconnect 216) at the maximum transfer rate that the ingress portion 204-xa and the interconnect 216 are capable of transferring data units to the egress portion 204-1b. Accordingly, at time t3, the ingress portion 204-xa begins transferring data units corresponding to the ingress source from the ingress queue 228 to the egress portion 204-xb (via the interconnect 216) at the maximum transfer rate).
10. Claims 5-6 ,14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Gupta in view of Kwan and further in view of Matthews et al. (US 12231354 B1) hereinafter Matthews.
Regarding claims 5, 14 and 17 claim 1 is incorporated. Gupta in view of Kwan may not explicitly disclose wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress comprises controlling an increase in an amount of power consumed by the switch. However, Matthews discloses wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the switch are processed for egress controls an increase in an amount of power consumed by the switch (col.14 lines 43-67, a traffic shaper is dynamically tuned based on one or more parameters. These parameters include, for example, monitored power
usage of the electronic device 200, the number of cell drops observed in the electronic device 200 to regulate power consumption by the electronic device 200, total buffer
(or buffer partition) usage of the electronic device 200, length of a queue (e.g., in bytes or cells) corresponding to an egress port, maximum delay (e.g., instantaneous or average delay) across a queue or across a subset of queues, or a suitable combination of these parameters. As an example, if the switching activity of the electronic device increases due to receiving data at high rates, thereby leading to increased power
consumption, then the number of tokens that are generated by a traffic shaper for admitting cells is dynamically adjusted to limit the increase in power consumption
by the device. In some implementations, the token generation rate by a traffic shaper, e.g. traffic shaper 210a, is reduced. This results in limiting the number of cells that are admitted for switching by the corresponding ingress arbiter, e.g., ingress arbiter 203a, leading to a reduction in power consumption).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Gupta in view of Kwan and include wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the switch are processed for egress controls an increase in an amount of power consumed by the switch using the teaching of Matthews. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to avoid situations where the packet processing rate and/or the cell processing rate of a large number of electronic devices are adjusted at the same time, or nearly the same time. By lowering the packet processing rate and/or cell processing rate, the electronic device limits the amount of data transiting the device, which reduces the maximum device current.
Regarding claim 6, claim 5 is incorporated. Matthews further discloses wherein the increase in the amount of power consumed by the switch is delayed (col. 14 lines 43-67, if the switching activity of the electronic device increases due to receiving data at high rates, thereby leading to increased power consumption, then the number of tokens that are generated by a traffic shaper for admitting cells is dynamically adjusted to limit the increase in power consumption by the device. In some implementations, the token generation rate by a traffic shaper, e.g. traffic shaper 210a, is reduced. This results in limiting the number of cells that are admitted for switching by the corresponding ingress arbiter, e.g., ingress arbiter 203a, leading to a reduction in power consumption. Dynamically managing the token generation by a traffic shaper can be achieved by adjusting the refresh time interval for the traffic shaper to refill its bucket. The refresh time interval can be increased so that the traffic shaper refills its bucket of tokens at a slower rate, and thus decreasing the rate at which its tokens are available for admitting cells).
11. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta
in view of Kwan and further in view of Singh et al. (US 20240243996 A1) hereinafter Singh.
Regarding claim8, claim 1 is incorporated. Gupta in view of Kwan may not explicitly disclose wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress affects a first one or more flows of a plurality of flows traversing the switch and a second one or more flows of the plurality of flows continue unaffected by the adjusting of the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress. However, Singh discloses wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress affects a first one or more flows of a plurality of flows traversing the switch and a second one or more flows of the plurality of flows continue unaffected by the adjusting of the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress (para [0004] identify an InCoS-Q corresponding to that particular class of service and associated with that particular host; and block that InCoS-Q, while allowing routing of the network traffic from one or more InCoS-Qs corresponding to that particular class of service).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Gupta in view of Kwan and include wherein dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress affects a first one or more flows of a plurality of flows traversing the switch and a second one or more flows of the plurality of flows continue unaffected by the adjusting of the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress using the teaching of Singh. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to block particular class of service without affecting any data transmission.
12. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Gupta in view of Kwan and further in view of Lee et al. (US 20040109477 A1) hereinafter Lee
Regarding claim 9, claim 1 is incorporated. Gupta in view of Kwan discloses the one or more circuits are further to determine a rate of change in a number of packets ingressing the switch, and dynamically adjusting the rate at which the packets to be transmitted from the egress queue are processed for egress is further in response to determining the rate of change in the number of packets ingressing the switch exceeds threshold rate of change (see Gupta (see Gupta, para. [0014] [0018] [0032]-[0033] and Kwan para. [0024] [0046], [0056]). However, Gupta in view of Kwan
not explicitly disclose the switch exceeds a second threshold. However, Lee discloses the switch exceeds a second threshold (para. [0046] the congestion status refers to an occasion that data packets stored in the buffer are over a first threshold, and the congestion prediction status refers to an occasion that data packets stored in the buffer are over a second threshold. If data packets stored in the buffer is over a certain setting value, that is, over a second threshold, the congestion control adjuster 43b predicts that network congestion will occur with a response signal transmitted to the transmitter 41 from the receivers 45, 47, and 49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Gupta in view of Kwan and include the switch exceeds a second threshold using the teaching of Lee. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to improve TCP data transmission efficiency in asymmetric environments.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kidest Mendaye whose telephone number is (571)272-2603. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 7:00 am-5:00pm EST. 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, Ario Etienne can be reached on (571) 272-4001. 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.
03/16/2029
/KIDEST MENDAYE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2457
/ARIO ETIENNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Prosecution Insights