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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
The indicated allowability of claims 1-20 is withdrawn in view of the newly discovered reference(s) to Sloop et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2023/0160941 A1). Rejections based on the newly cited reference(s) follow.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-9, 11-14 and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hathorn et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2014/0055776 A1) in view of Yang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2020/0174754 A1) and Sloop et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2023/0160941 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 1 a computer program product for facilitating processing within a computing environment, the computer program product comprising: one or more computer readable storage media (storage medium 1310) and program instructions (Hathorn et al. teaches in paragraph [0031] program code stored in computer-readable medium) collectively stored on the one or more computer readable storage media, the program instructions collectively stored comprising: program instructions to obtain, by a receiving network device (channel adapter 200), a command built to enable a control program of a device coupled to the receiving network device to request optical power data of one or more components of one or more network devices (Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 4 a request command), the command including an indication of the one or more components for which the optical power data is to be obtained (FIG. 4 teaches that bytes 0-2 contain the port ID for which optical power data is to be obtained); program instructions to obtain, by the receiving network device, the optical power data of the one or more components indicated by the command; and program instructions to provide, by the receiving network device, a response to the request for the optical power data of the one or more components (Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 5 the format of the response). The difference between Hathorn et al. and the claimed invention is that Hathorn et al. does not teach that the command uses a command structure built to be used with the command, the command structure provided to the receiving network device and including the indication of the one or more components for which the optical power data is to be obtained and one or more fields to include, at least, historical receive power levels of the one or more components. Yang et al. teaches in FIG. 4 a system for creating and executing commands. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Yang et al. with the system of Hathorn et al. because the command system of Yang et al. can generate commands that are more flexible and include more functionalities (parameters). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a command system to build commands, as taught by Yang et al., in the system of Hathorn et al.
The combination of Hathorn et al. and Yang et al. still fails to teach obtaining historical receive power levels of the one or more components. Sloop et al. teaches in paragraph [0213] the need for retrieving historical power data. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Sloop et al. with the modified system of Hathorn et al. and Yang et al. because historical power information of a component may be useful in analyzing performance of the component. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to obtain historical receive power levels, as taught by Sloop et al., in the modified system of Hathorn et al. and Yang et al.
Regarding claim 2, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 1 storage area network 120.
Regarding claim 3, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 5 that word 1 contains transmitted optical power.
Regarding claim 4, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 5 that word 2 contains received optical power.
Regarding claim 5, Hathorn et al. teaches in teaches in paragraph [0024] that the ELS command can be sent from any port (i.e., source port) to any end port for retrieving optical power information. This implies that any network device in between the source port and the end port forwards the command to the next device along the path between the source port and the end port.
Regarding claim 7, Yang et al. teaches in FIG. 1 and paragraph [0041] that the program modules include an operating system.
Regarding claim 8, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 5 receive power level and transmit power level.
Regarding claim 9, it is obvious that the historical power data can include both transmit power levels and receive power levels.
Claim 11 is rejected based on the same reason for rejecting claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 1 storage area network 120.
Regarding claim 13, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 5 that word 1 contains transmitted optical power and word 2 contains received optical power.
Regarding claim 14, it is obvious that the historical power data can include both transmit power levels and receive power levels.
Claim 16 is rejected based on the same reason for rejecting claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 1 storage area network 120.
Regarding claim 18, Hathorn et al. teaches in FIG. 5 receive power level and transmit power level.
Regarding claim 19, it is obvious that the historical power data can include both transmit power levels and receive power levels.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hathorn et al., Yang et al. and Sloop et al. as applied to claims 1-5, 7-9, 11-14 and 16-19 above, and further in view of Guendert et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2021/0263877 A1).
Hathorn et al., Yang et al. and Sloop et al. have been discussed above in regard to claims 1-5, 7-9, 11-14 and 16-19. The difference between Hathorn et al., Yang et al. and Sloop et al. and the claimed invention is that Hathorn et al., Yang et al. and Sloop et al. do not teach that the command is a control unit port command constructed based on a defined format, the defined format including a command code, a command name and a description of the command. Guendert et al. teaches in FIG. 6 and paragraph [0109] a general format of a command which includes a command code 602, a command name 604 and a command description 606. One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the teaching of Guendert et al. with the modified system of Hathorn et al., Yang et al. and Sloop et al. because it is a simple substitution of one known, equivalent element for another to obtain predictable results. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a command code, a command name and a command description in a command, as taught by Guendert et al., in the modified system of Hathorn et al., Yang et al. and Sloop et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 15 and 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHI K LI whose telephone number is (571)272-3031. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:53 a.m. -3:23 p.m.
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, David Payne can be reached at 571 272-3024. 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.
skl21 May 2026
/SHI K LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights