Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/443,475

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR GRANULAR DYNAMIC QUOTA-BASED CONGESTION MANAGEMENT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 16, 2024
Examiner
YUEN, KAN
Art Unit
2464
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
738 granted / 833 resolved
+30.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
860
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
§103
50.9%
+10.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.5%
-21.5% vs TC avg
§112
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 833 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 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. Claim(s) 21, 30, 31, 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (Pat No.: 10,063,481) in view of Lee et al. (Pub No.: 2022/0124035). Regarding claim 40, Jiang et al. discloses a computer system (read as the source in fig. 1), comprising: a processing resource (although Jiang et al. is silent about processor and memory however is it implied that the method steps in fig. 1 requires a source to have a processor and a memory); and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that when executed by the processing resource cause the computer system to: allocate a first buffer (read as the send queue in cited portion) to a first process of an application executing on a computer system (read as source 102 in fig. 1) (Jiang et al. see column 8, lines 14-32; The source endpoint created a separate send queue for each destination and the destination endpoint created a separate receive queue for each source. Multiple active send queues at a source arbitrated for the injection channel on a per packet, round-robin basis.). Thus, the source is allocated with a send queue for storing and transmitting traffics (e.g., first process of an application); identify, by the computer system, a second buffer (read as receive queue in cited portion) at a last-hop switch (read as last-hop switch in fig. 1) of a receiver node (read as the destination 108 in fig. 1), the second buffer storing packets of a second process of the application executing on the receiver node (Jiang et al. see column 2, lines 38-48; column 4, lines 48-64; column 5, lines 28-34; The message is received at one of a plurality of network switches. The network switch determines a congestion level and if the congestion level is high, the message is dropped. If the message is dropped, the network switch generates a NACK which is transmitted to the source.); The source identifies that congestion at the last-hop and the destination based on the received NACK. The receive queue at the last-hop stores traffic (e.g., second process of the application) from the source; determine, by the computer system, a plurality of criteria (read as in the NACK and reservation 120 and the predetermined time 124 in cited portion) indicating whether a next packet (read as message packet 122) from the first buffer can be accommodated in the second buffer (Jiang et al. see fig. 1, NACK and reservation 120, the predetermined time 124, message packet 122; column 5, lines 40-65; After the NACK and reservation 120 are received by the source 102, the source 102, using the reservation, schedules a transmission of the message packet 122 as a non-speculative packet at a predetermined time 124). The source determines, based on the NACK and reservation 120 and the predetermined time 124 indicating whether a next packet from the source can be accommodated in the last hop switch (e.g., receive queue) of the destination. However, Jiang et al. does not explicitly disclose the feature to evaluate, by the computer system, the plurality of criteria based on a set of network parameters associated with the second buffer and in-flight packets in a network yet to be delivered to the second buffer; and in response to the next packet satisfying the plurality of criteria, allow the first process to send the next packet from the first buffer to the second process via the second buffer. Lee et al. from the same or similar fields of endeavor discloses a processing resource (see processors 510 in fig. 5); and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (see memory subsystem 520 in fig. 5) storing instructions that when executed by the processing resource cause the computer system to evaluate, by the computer system, the plurality of criteria (read as transmit rate and baseline-RTT in parr. 0024) based on a set of network parameters (read as the level of congestion, link utilization and remaining bandwidth in para. 0015) associated with the second buffer and in-flight packets (read as congestion metrics observed by congestion monitor 107 in para. 0020) in a network yet to be delivered to the second buffer (Lee et al. see para. 0015, 0020, 0024, 0029-0031; In para. 0024, …Sender 100 can utilize received metrics to determine BW available per-queue in order to adjust a transmit rate of packets sent to the queue… In some examples, sender 100 can adjusts its transmit rate within one baseline-RTT. In para. 0020, … Switch 105, in a forwarding path from switch 110 to sender 100, can compare its current value of congestion metrics against received congestion metrics. If the congestion metrics are less than congestion metrics observed by congestion monitor 107 of switch 105, switch 105 can propagate congestion metrics observed by congestion monitor 107 of switch 105 to sender 100.). The sender evaluates and adjusts the transmit rate within a baseline-RTT based on the received congestion metrics associated with the last-hop switch 115. In addition, the received congestion metrics from the last hop switch 115 is compare with the congestion metrics obtained by the switch 105, wherein the congestion metrics of switch 105 includes level of congestion of in-flight packets yet to be delivered to the last hop switch; and in response to the next packet satisfying the plurality of criteria, allow the first process to send the next packet from the first buffer to the second process via the second buffer (Lee et al. see para. 0024, 0029-0031; In para. 0024, … For example, when there is higher-priority traffic, the available BW for a queue is smaller than the link bandwidth and can experience large and fast changes over time. Sender 100 can increase or decrease a transmit rate of packets directed to a queue or port associated with the indicated available BW based on the received indication of available BW. In para. 0031, …In response to receipt of congestion metrics, the sender can adjust its transmit rate of packets of a flow directed to the queue or port associated with the congestion metrics. For example, the sender can adjust the transmit rate within one baseline round trip time (RTT). In some cases, the sender can increase transmit rate if the congestion metrics indicate congestion is lessening. In some cases, the sender can reduce transmit rate if the congestion metrics indicate congestion is increasing.). The sender determines the BW available and adjusts the transmit rate within a baseline RTT to fulfill/satisfy for next packet transmission (e.g., higher priority traffic) from the source to the switch 115 (e.g., last hop switch) of the receiver 130. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of Jiang et al. and to implement with the feature to allow transmission of next packet based on evaluating a plurality of criteria based on a set of network parameters and in-flight packets. The motivation would be to improve transmission reliability. Claim 21 and 31 are rejected similarly to claim 40. Regarding claim 30, Lee et al. discloses for evaluating the plurality of criteria in response to detecting at least one triggering event; and wherein the triggering event comprises: initiating a transaction request by the first process, injecting a packet by the first process, receiving a response from the second buffer, or detecting a packet drop (Lee et al. see para. 0024; Sender 100 can utilize received metrics to determine BW available per-queue in order to adjust a transmit rate of packets sent to the queue or port in switch 110 associated with received congestion or bandwidth metrics.). The sender evaluates the BW available per-queue and the transmit rate based on the triggering event such as the received response (e.g., congestion or bandwidth metrics). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of Jiang et al. and to implement with the feature to evaluating the plurality of criteria based on triggering event such as receiving a response from the second buffer. The motivation would be to improve transmission reliability. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 22-29, 32-39 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. Examiner's Note The Applicant is welcome to request a telephonic interview if the Applicant has any questions or requires any additional information that would further or expedite the prosecution of the application. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sindhu et al. (Pub No.: 2010/0061391) discloses one embodiment, an apparatus can include a first edge device that can have a packet processing module. The first edge device can be configured to receive a packet. The packet processing module of the first edge device can be configured to produce cells based on the packet. A second edge device can have a packet processing module configured to reassemble the packet based on the cells. A multi-stage switch fabric can be coupled to the first edge device and the second edge device. The multi-stage switch fabric can define a single logical entity. The multi-stage switch fabric can have switch modules. Each switch module from the switch modules can have a shared memory device. The multi-stage switch fabric can be configured to switch the cells so that the cells are sent to the second edge device. Anand et al. (Pub No.: 2012/0140626) discloses some embodiments, an apparatus includes a flow control module configured to receive a first data packet from an output queue of a stage of a multi-stage switch at a first rate when an available capacity of the output queue crosses a first threshold. The flow control module is configured to receive a second data packet from the output queue of the stage of the multi-stage switch at a second rate when the available capacity of the output queue crosses a second threshold. The flow control module configured to send a flow control signal to an edge device of the multi-stage switch from which the first data packet or the second data packet entered the multi-stage switch. Hurson et al. (Pub No.: 2019/0342199) discloses examples described herein include configuration of a transmitting network device to identify a source queue-pair identifier in at least some of the packets that are transmitted to an endpoint destination. A network device that receives packets and experiences congestion can determine if a congestion causing packet includes a source queue-pair identifier. If the congestion causing packet includes a source queue-pair identifier, the network device can form and transmit a congestion notification message with a copy of the source queue-pair identifier to the transmitting network device. The transmitting network device can access a context for the congestion causing packet using the source queue-pair identifier without having to perform a lookup to identify the context. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAN YUEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1413. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:30am-7pm. 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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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. /KAN YUEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 16, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604235
WIRELESS NETWORK LOAD BALANCING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592765
Software-Defined Filtering in a Repeater
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593246
PREDICTIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)-BASED WIRELESS STATION LOAD BALANCING BASED ON ACCESS POINT UPLINK UTILIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587907
Handover method and apparatus, and information transmitting method and apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587927
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CONDITIONAL RECONFIGURATION IN INTEGRATED ACCESS AND BACKHAUL (IAB)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+14.0%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 833 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month