DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communication on October 10th, 2023.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Keith et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication no. 2018/0270156, hereinafter Keith).
With respect to claims 1 and 7, Keith discloses a packet processing apparatus and method (paragraph [0046], lines 1-8, WAN optimization application 205), comprising:
a first interface to be coupled to a host processor having a memory (paragraph [0038], lines 1-5, interface unit 200 or gateway 200);
a second interface to be coupled to a packet communication network (paragraph [0046], lines 1-8, deployed between the networks 104 and 104’); and
one or more packet processing circuits, to receive messages comprising data from the memory via the first interface for transmission over the packet communication network to a specified destination address (paragraph [0050], lines 7-13, communicates a transport layer packet with the encoded information to a second appliance), to encode the messages in a series of data records having respective record headers (paragraph [0050], lines 7-13, communicates a transport layer packet with the encoded information to a second appliance), to encapsulate the data records in respective payloads of a sequence of data packets (paragraph [0240], lines 20-33, encapsulated within traffic of another protocol;) such that at least some of the data records span multiple consecutive data packets in the sequence (paragraph [0253], lines 7-10, sequency number of packets), to set a quality of service (QoS) field in a respective packet header of each data packet in the sequence to a first value when a payload of the data packet contains one of the record headers (paragraph [0251], lines 1-7, QoS processing 714 may perform packet header inspections) and otherwise to set the QoS field to a second value, different from the first value (paragraph [0245], wherein the “lazy byte batching” applies a different QoS process to the subset of packets in order to reduce QoS packet processing overheard), and to transmit the sequence of data packets via the second interface over the packet communication network to the specified destination address (paragraph [0251], lines 7-21, QoS queues 718 may similarly comprise ring buffers, FIFO buffers, or any similar buffer or memory structure used for holding or accumulating packets for eventual transmission, according to traffic shaping policies or algorithms).
With respect to claims 2 and 8, Keith discloses the apparatus according to claims 1 and 7, wherein the first and second values of the QoS field are selected such that the data packets having the first value of the QoS field are less likely to be dropped by components in the packet communication network than the data packets having the second value of the QoS field (paragraph [0251], lines 7-21, emptying high priority queues at a faster rate than low priority queues; paragraph [0252], highest accuracy).
With respect to claims 3 and 9, Keith discloses the apparatus according to claims 1 and 7, wherein the QoS field is a differentiated services field in an Internet Protocol (IP) header of the data packets (paragraph [0050], IP header).
With respect to claims 5 and 12, Keith discloses the apparatus according to claims 1 and 7, wherein the one or more packet processing circuits are to encode the messages in accordance with a session-layer protocol (paragraph [0088], consistent with paragraph [0018] of the instant application’s specification disclosing TLS and SSL as a session layer protocol).
With respect to claims 6 and 17, Keith discloses the apparatus according to claims 1 and 7, wherein the one or more packet processing circuits are to encapsulate and transmit the data records in accordance with a reliable transport protocol (paragraph [0092], lines 1-8, TCP/IP based stack).
With respect to claim 13, Keith discloses the method according to claim 12, wherein encoding the messages comprises encrypting the data records in accordance with the session-layer protocol (paragraph [0088], consistent with paragraph [0018] of the instant application’s specification disclosing TLS and SSL as a session layer protocol).
With respect to claim 14, Keith discloses the method according to claim 13, wherein the session-layer protocol comprises a Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol (paragraph [0088]).
With respect to claim 15, Keith discloses the method according to claim 12, wherein encoding the messages comprises adding tags to the data records in accordance with the session-layer protocol (paragraph [0092], tag each packet with appropriate meta data).
With respect to claim 16, Keith discloses the method according to claim 15, wherein each tag comprises a digest of a corresponding data record (paragraph [0092], tag each packet with appropriate meta data).
With respect to claim 18, Keith discloses the method according to claim 17, wherein the reliable transport protocol comprises a Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) (paragraph [0092], lines 1-8, TCP/IP based stack).
With respect to claim 19, Keith discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the sequence of the data packets is transmitted by a network interface controller (NIC) in response to receiving the messages from a host processor (paragraph [0249], lines 13-20, NIC 552), and wherein the QoS field is set by the host processor under control of software running on the host processor (paragraph [0249], lines 1-13, QoS processing 714).
With respect to claim 20, Keith discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the sequence of the data packets is transmitted by a network interface controller (NIC) in response to receiving the messages from a host processor, and wherein the QoS field is set by the NIC (paragraph [0249], lines 1-13, QoS processing 714).
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.
Claims 4 and 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keith as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Arrobo Vidal et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication no. 2022/0255867, hereinafter Arrobo).
With respect to claims 4 and 10, Keith discloses the apparatus according to claims 1 and 7, but Keith does not diclose the QoS field is a class of service field in an Ethernet header of the data packets.
However, Arrobo discloses the QoS field is a class of service field in an Ethernet header of the data packets (paragraph [0052], traffic class (TC) field).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the increasing QoS throughput and efficiency through lazy byte batching of Keith with the enabling quality of service in information centric network of Arrobo. The motivation to combine being to improve reduce the overhead of QoS processing. The reduction of overhead of QoS processing being accomplished by prioritizing the first interested packet of a data flow (paragraph [0039]: Arrobo).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keith as applied to claims 7 above, and further in view of Koral Vidal et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication no. 2020/0328956, hereinafter Koral).
With respect to claim 11, Keith discloses the method according to claim 7, but does not disclose the QoS field comprises experimental bits in a multiprotocol label switching (MPLS) header of the data packets.
However, Koral discloses the QoS field comprises experimental bits in a multiprotocol label switching (MPLS) header of the data packets (paragraph [0016], the MPLS experimental bits field is a 3-bit filed in the MPLS header that can be used to define the QoS treatment).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the increasing QoS throughput and efficiency through lazy byte batching of Keith with the method for external non-intrusive packet delay measurement of Koral. The motivation to combine being to improve the treatment of packet processing. The treatment of packet processing being improved by measuring the overhead of packet processing (abstract: Koral).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Craft Patent no. 9,306,793
Luo Pat. Pub. 2015/0127849
Starr Patent no. 8,019,901
Thyagaturu Pat. Pub. 2023/0006889
Rice Pat. Pub. 2020/0028744
Howe Pat. Pub. 2016/0021224
Duraj Patent no. 11,388,225
Xiong Pat. Pub. 2008/0291916
Kutch Pat. Pub. 2021/0117360
Sharma Pat. Pub. 2023/0247054
Kompella Pat. Pub. 2018/0309632
Shilimkar Pat. Pub. 2022/0210225
Foo Pat. Pub. 2024/00539930
Monshizadeh Patent no. 11,849,011
Rabie Patent no. 8,718,057
Arad Patent no. 7,697,422
Dao Pat. Pub. 2019/0254118
Xie Pat. Pub. 2024/0098019
Chang Pat. Pub. 2019/0207868
Walheim Pat. Pub. 2013/0061034
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAKE J RUBIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3802. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm.
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 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.
3/19/26
/BLAKE J RUBIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457