DETAILED ACTION
1.This communication is in response to the Remarks filed on 01/22/2026. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
1a. Status of the claims:
Claims 1-20 are pending.
1b. The rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ) is withdrawn. Applicant’s argument is persuasive a new non-final is made.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments filed 01/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A, Applicant argues that Ding does not disclose "a first computing device that is external to the LAN, the first computing device operable to provide a virtual gateway that provides default gateway functionality to computing devices connected to the LAN". Office Action at 3-4.. Ding is directed to "a cloud environment access method" involving routing between "a first virtual machine" and "a second virtual machine," as recited in claims 1 and 12. (Remarks, page 9).
In response to A, The Examiner disagrees DING discloses in page 2 paragraph 7 starting with establishing a virtual link that the gateway virtual machine established a virtual link that is used for data transmission where the data transmission is the functionality that is connected the LAN to a virtual gateway (the functionality that is connected the LAN to a virtual gateway is considered as the default gateway because it is the gateway that routes the first routing information, and is also an external gateway to both LANs; as can be seen, the virtual gateway is between two cloud environments, first cloud environment ( first LAN) and second cloud environment (second LAN) (see page 4 first full paragraph starting with The embodiment of the first application…).
B, Applicant argues that “Nowhere does Ding disclose that the gateway virtual machine provides "default gateway functionality to computing devices connected to the LAN" and "is external to the LAN" as recited in claim 1," as recited in claims 1. (Remarks, page 10).
In response to B, The Examiner disagrees DING discloses a virtual gateway that is external to a first LAN because DING discloses in page 2 paragraph 7 starting with establishing a virtual link the gateway virtual machine established a virtual link that is used for data transmission where the data transmission is the functionality that is connected the LAN to a virtual gateway (the functionality that is connected the LAN to a virtual gateway is considered as being performed by the default gateway because it is the virtual gateway that routes the first routing information and is also an external gateway to both LANs; as can be seen, the virtual gateway is between two cloud environments, first cloud environment ( first LAN) and second cloud environment (second LAN) (see page 4 first full paragraph starting with The embodiment of the first application…).
C, Applicant argues that “ Nowhere does paragraph [0076] of Hyukjin even mention a DHCP Discover message, let alone disclose "modifying, by the bridged gateway, the first DHCP Discover message to include a QOS special treatment indicator" as recited in claim 1. The Applicant’s argument is persuasive. A new art is cited for addressing the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 8-9, 11 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DING (CN 116599900 A),in view of Jia et al. (hereinafter “Jia”) (US 8,099,517 B2) in view of Hegde et al. (hereinafter “Hegde”) (US 2021/0067380 A1), and further in view of Pfautz et al. (hereinafter “Pfautz”) (US 2014/0160924 A1).
Regarding claim 1,DING discloses a method comprising:
establishing, by a bridged gateway coupled to a local area network (LAN) in a premises, a layer 2 tunnel with a first computing device that is external to the LAN ( a link between a local area network connected to a gateway virtual machine ( the gateway virtual machine is equated to the first computing device) and a receiving end used a data link layer (layer 2) isolated from a virtual area network is connected to network card of the receiving end (where the receiving end is equated to a computer network and the link isolated from the local area network is equated to a tunnel external to the network), DING, page 5, paragraph 8 starting with private cloud environment; page 23, 7 full paragraph starting with In a possible design… where the gateway virtual machine is connected to the routing virtual machine that routes data to the gateway virtual machine, (the routing virtual machine is equated to the bridge gateway), page 2 paragraph 7 starting with establishing a virtual link between the routing.. ) ), the first computing device operable to provide a virtual gateway that provides default gateway functionality to computing devices connected to the LAN (the gateway virtual machine established a virtual link that is used for data transmission where the data transmission is the functionality that is connected the LAN to a virtual gateway (the functionality that is connected the LAN to a virtual gateway is considered as the default gateway because it is the gateway that routes the first routing information) , DING, page 2 paragraph 7 starting with establishing a virtual link).
DING does not disclose modifying, by the bridged gateway, the first DHCP Discover message to include a QOS special treatment indicator to generate a modified DHCP Discover message.
Jia discloses modifying, by the bridged gateway, the first DHCP Discover message to include a QOS special treatment indicator to generate a modified DHCP Discover message (generate a DHCP discover message that indicates that the client device desires to be configured for network access where the strict priority quality of service is applied at home router (bridge gateway where the quality of service is assigned, Jia, column 3, lines 23-34; column 4, lines 25-39).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Jia’s teachings with DING’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently generate (DHCP) message that is used to indicate a change of QoS indicating a strict priority over a best effort.
DING in view Jia do not disclose receiving, by the bridged gateway from a second computing device connected to the LAN, a first dynamic host configuration protocol (DHCP) Discover message; sending, by the bridged gateway to the first computing device via the layer 2 tunnel, the modified DHCP Discover message.
Hegde discloses receiving, by the bridged gateway from a second computing device connected to the LAN, a first dynamic host configuration protocol (DHCP) Discover message (received messages (e.g. DHCP Offers) are broadcasted to LAN side of the branch gateway (where the branch gateway is the second computer device) , where the LAN branch having a variety devices having several QOS , Hegde, [0018]; [0019];[0020]; [0072]); and
sending, by the bridged gateway to the first computing device via the layer 2 tunnel, the modified DHCP Discover message (broadcasting a new message (e.g. DHCP Discovers) that includes the information regarding QoS, using layer 2 of the OSI model ( the dynamic altered configuration of the DHCP Discover message is equated to a modified DHCP Discover message) , Hegde, [0020] ;[0068]; [0072]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Hedge’s teachings with DING’s teaching in view of Jia’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently configure a LAN based on devices that the network are connected by dynamically allowing bandwidths that are based on the Quality of services of the devices.
DING in view of Jia in view of Hedge do not disclose determining, by the bridged gateway, that the second computing device is to be given a different quality of service (QOS) treatment that differs from a default QOS treatment associated with the LAN.
Pfautz discloses determining, by the bridged gateway, that the second computing device is to be given a different quality of service (QOS) treatment that differs from a default QOS treatment associated with the LAN ( a QoS treatment of service being identified for a peer network via a customer edge gateway where the QoS treatment is different from a default quality of service and the customer gateway is equated to the second computer device; [0052] gateway protocol, Pfautz , [0022] ).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Pfautz’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently change the quality of service of a device in real time when the rate commensurate with a forwarded packet is different.
Regarding claim 2, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 1 wherein determining that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment comprises:
DING in view of Jia and in view of Hedge do not disclose sending, by the bridged gateway to a control plane component that is external to the LAN, information that identifies the second computing device; receiving, by the bridged gateway from the control plan component, a message indicating that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment.
Pfautz discloses sending, by the bridged gateway to a control plane component that is external to the LAN, information that identifies the second computing device ( Router 110 is identified as the destination device (second computing device) using a control plane, Pfautz , [0036] ;[0037]; [0030]; Fig 2); and
receiving, by the bridged gateway from the control plan component, a message indicating that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment ( a propagated/advertised information specified in a routing message that Router 110 the destination device (second computing device) has a changed QoS treatment that is different than the default QoS, Pfautz , [0022]; [0045]; [0052];Fig.1).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Pfautz’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings of in view of Hedge’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently change the quality of service of a device in real time when the rate commensurate with a forwarded packet is different.
Regarding claim 4, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 2 .
DING in view of Jia do not disclose wherein the information comprises a MAC address of the second computing device.
Hegde discloses wherein the information comprises a MAC address of the second computing device ( the message include a MAC address of the device , Hegde, [0026]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Hedge’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Pfautz’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently configure a LAN based on devices that the network are connected to by using the MAC address of the device for doing so.
Regarding claim 6, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 1.
DING in view of Jia do not disclose further comprising: analyzing, by the bridged gateway, the first DHCP Discover message to determine that the first DHCP Discover message is a DHCP Discover message.
Hegde discloses further comprising: analyzing, by the bridged gateway, the first DHCP Discover message to determine that the first DHCP Discover message is a DHCP Discover message ( a DHCP Discover message is recognized to be a DHCP Discover message by a response being a DHCP offer, Hegde, [0026]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Hedge’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Pfautz’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently configured a LAN based on devices that the network are connected by dynamically allowing bandwidths that are based on the Quality of services of the devices.
Regarding claim 8, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 1.
DING in view of Jia do not disclose further comprising: receiving, by the virtual gateway, the modified DHCP discover message.
Hegde discloses further comprising: receiving, by the virtual gateway, the modified DHCP discover message (received messages (e.g. DHCP Offers) are broadcasted to LAN side of the branch gateway, where the LAN branch having a variety devices having several QOS , Hegde, [0018]; [0019];[0020]; [0072]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Hedge’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently configure a LAN based on devices that the network are connected by dynamically allowing bandwidths that are based on the Quality of services of the devices.
DING in view of Jia and in view of Hedge do not disclose determining, by the virtual gateway based on the QOS special treatment indicator, that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment; and storing, by the virtual gateway, information that indicates that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment.
Pfautz discloses determining, by the virtual gateway based on the QOS special treatment indicator that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment ( a specified quality of service being identified for a peer network via a border where the specified quality is different from a default quality of service ; [0052] gateway protocol, Pfautz , [0022] ); and storing, by the virtual gateway, information that indicates that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment ( a specified quality of service being identified for a peer network via a border routers having gateway where the specified quality is different from a default quality of service ; [0052] gateway protocol, Pfautz , [0022]; Fig 1 ).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Pfautz’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently change the quality of service of a device in real time when the rate commensurate with a forwarded packet is different.
Regarding claim 9, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 8.
DING in view of Jia and in view of Hedge do not disclose further comprising: subsequent to storing the information that indicates that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment, receiving, by the virtual gateway via the layer 2 tunnel, a packet originating from the second computing device; accessing the information that indicates that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment; and causing, by the virtual gateway, the second computing device to receive the different QOS treatment.
Pfautz discloses further comprising: subsequent to storing the information that indicates that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment ( a specified quality of service being identified for a peer network via a border where the specified quality is different from a default quality of service ; [0052] gateway protocol, Pfautz , [0022] ), receiving, by the virtual gateway via the layer 2 tunnel, a packet originating from the second computing device ( a propagated/advertised information specified in a routing message that route message to Router 110 the destination device (second computing device) that has a specified QoS treatment that is different than the default QoS, Pfautz , [0045]; [0052];Fig.1);
accessing the information that indicates that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment ( a propagated/advertised information specified in a routing message that Router 110 the destination device (second computing device) has a specified QoS treatment that is different than the default QoS, Pfautz , [0045]; [0052];Fig.1); and causing, by the virtual gateway, the second computing device to receive the different QOS treatment ( a propagated/advertised information specified in a routing message that Router 110 the destination device (second computing device) has a specified QoS treatment that is different than the default QoS , Pfautz , [0045]; [0052];Fig.1).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Pfautz’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently change the quality of service of a device in real time when the rate commensurate with a forwarded packet is different.
Regarding claim 11, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 1.
DING in view of Jia do not disclose further comprising: sending, by the virtual gateway to the second computing device via the layer 2 tunnel, a DHCP offer message.
Hegde discloses further comprising: sending, by the virtual gateway to the second computing device via the layer 2 tunnel, a DHCP offer message ( the link used to send a DHCP offer is a data link layer (Layer 2), Hedge, [0018]; [0068]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Hedge’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of HYUKJIN’s teachings in view of Pfautz’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently configured a LAN based on devices that the network are connected by dynamically allowing bandwidths that are based on the Quality of services of the devices.
Regarding claim 13, DING discloses a bridged gateway, comprising: a memory; a transceiver operable to be coupled to a local area network (LAN); and a processor device coupled to the memory and the transceiver ( a memory storing instructions executed by a processor, DING, page 26 , paragraphs 2 and 3 starting with When the memory 1102…; a gateway virtual machine connected to a LAN, DING, page 9, paragraph 5, starting with an when the vxlan is establish,… (a gateway is equated to a transceiver)); in addition, claim 13 is substantially similar to claim 1, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is substantially similar to claim 2, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is substantially similar to claim 2, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 17, DING discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that includes executable instructions ( a memory storing instructions executed by a processor, DING, page 26 , paragraphs 2 and 3 starting with When the memory 1102…); in addition, claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 1, thus the same rationale applies.
4a. Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DING in view of Jia in view of Hegde, and further in view of Pfautz, and further in view of Gandhewar et al. (hereinafter “Gandhewar”) (US 2019/0387465 A1).
Regarding claim 3, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 2.
DING in view of HYUKJIN in view of Hegde, and in view of Pfautz do not disclose wherein sending, by the bridged gateway to the control plane component that is external to the LAN, the information that identifies the second computing device comprises sending, by the bridged gateway to the control plane component via a path other than the layer 2 tunnel, the information that identifies the second computing device.
Gandhewar discloses wherein sending, by the bridged gateway to the control plane component that is external to the LAN, the information that identifies the second computing device comprises sending, by the bridged gateway to the control plane component via a path other than the layer 2 tunnel, the information that identifies the second computing device (device identifier 20 (another device) is identified with access service request having an extensible protocol transport layer using BNG and control plan, Gandhewar, [0029]; [0024]; Fig 1).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Gandhewar’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings and in view of Pfautz’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently identify a level of service of a device by using a level of service indicator for doing so.
Regarding claim 5, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 2 further comprising:
DING in view of Jia and in view of Hegde do not disclose determining, by the control plane component based on the first record, that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment.
Pfautz discloses determining, by the control plane component based on the first record, that the second computing device is to be given the different QOS treatment ( a propagated/advertised information specified in a routing message that Router 110 the destination device (second computing device) has a specified QoS treatment that is different than the default QoS, Pfautz , [0045]; [0052];Fig.1).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Pfautz’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently change the quality of service of a device in real time when the rate commensurate with a forwarded packet is different.
DING in view of Jia in view of Hegde, and in view of Pfautz do not disclose receiving, by the control plane component, the information that identifies the second computing device; accessing, by the control plane component, a first record of a plurality records, at least some of the plurality of records corresponding to different computing devices associated with different LANS, the first record corresponding to the second computing device.
Gandhewar discloses receiving, by the control plane component, the information that identifies the second computing device ( receiving the IP address of device (another device) that is identified in the request for network 2 using BNG and control plan, Gandhewar, [0029]; [0024]; Fig 1); accessing, by the control plane component, a first record of a plurality records, at least some of the plurality of records corresponding to different computing devices associated with different LANS, the first record corresponding to the second computing device (session records being accessed using request messages from several wireless connection devices for a plurality of VLANs including a request message from a device of network 2 using BNG and control plan, Gandhewar, [0028]; [0029]; [0024]; [0060]; Fig 1; where the traffics (sessions) are disclosed in [0060] from different VLAN); and
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Gandhewar’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings and in view of Pfautz’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently identify a level of service of a device by using a level of service indicator for doing so.
4c. Claims 7, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DING in view of Jia in view of Hegde, in view of Pfautz, and further in view of Dillon et al. (hereinafter “Dillon”) (US 2019/0158371 A1).
Regarding claim 7, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 1.
DING in view of Jia in view of Hegde, and in view of Pfautz do not disclose wherein the different QOS treatment comprises one or more of a higher bandwidth than a service tier bandwidth of the LAN, use of a lower latency queue than a default latency queue associated with the LAN, a larger buffer than a default buffer associated with the LAN, and a custom path through a service provider network that is different from a default path through the service provider network.
Dillon discloses wherein the different QOS treatment comprises one or more of a higher bandwidth than a service tier bandwidth of the LAN (transmission exceed available bandwidth in a branch of office , Dillon, [0045]), use of a lower latency queue than a default latency queue associated with the LAN (lower threshold of latency of a queue , Dillon, [0228];[0054]), a larger buffer than a default buffer associated with the LAN ( packets are directed to different router when a router is full , Dillon, [0004]), and a custom path through a service provider network that is different from a default path through the service provider network (a third party Network Access Provider being used instead of the traditional VPN router traditionally , Dillon, [0047]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Dillon’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings and in view of Pfautz’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently avoid congestion in a link by using a high bandwidth level for transmitting packets.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is substantially similar to claim 7, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is substantially similar to claim 7, thus the same rationale applies.
4d. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DING in view of HYUKJIN in view of Hegde, in view of in view of Pfautz, and further in view of Dillon et al. (hereinafter “Dillon”) (US 2019/0158371 A1).
Regarding claim 10, DING, HYUKJIN, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 9.
DING in view of Jia in view of Hegde, and in view of Pfautz do not disclose wherein causing, by the virtual gateway, the second computing device to receive the different QOS treatment comprises causing, by the virtual gateway, a packet flow between the second computing device and a third computing device to have a higher bandwidth than a service tier bandwidth of the LAN.
Dillon discloses wherein causing, by the virtual gateway, the second computing device to receive the different QOS treatment comprises causing, by the virtual gateway, a packet flow between the second computing device and a third computing device to have a higher bandwidth than a service tier bandwidth of the LAN(a third party Network Access Provider being used instead of the traditional VPN router traditionally , Dillon, [0047]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Dillon’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings and in view of Pfautz’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently avoid congestion in a link by using a high bandwidth level for transmitting packets.
4e. Claims 12, 16, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable DING over in view of Jia in view of Hegde, in view of Pfautz, and further in view of WU (CN 101127654 A) in view of QUANCAI et al. (hereinafter “QUANCAI”) (EP 2940971 A1).
Regarding claim 12, DING, Jia, Hegde, and Pfautz disclose the method of claim 1.
DING in view of Jia in view of Hegde, and in view of Pfautz do not disclose further comprising: receiving, by the bridged gateway from a third computing device connected to the LAN, a second DHCP Discover message; determining, by the bridged gateway, that the third computing device is not to be given a different QOS treatment that differs from the default QOS treatment associated with the LAN; inhibiting modifying the second DHCP Discover message; and sending, by the bridged gateway to the first computing device via the layer 2 tunnel, the second DHCP Discover message.
WU discloses further comprising: receiving, by the bridged gateway from a third computing device connected to the LAN, a second DHCP Discover message; determining, by the bridged gateway, that the third computing device is not to be given a different QOS treatment that differs from the default QOS treatment associated with the LAN (QoS Quality of Service policy satisfy the service local area network device , WU, page 1 paragraph 2 starting with service network equipment setting..).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate WU’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings and in view of Pfautz’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently keep the level of quality of service unchanged by keeping the parameter of quality of service fixed in the LAN.
DING in view of Jia, in view of Hegde, in view of Pfautz, and in view of WU do not disclose inhibiting modifying the second DHCP Discover message; and sending, by the bridged gateway to the first computing device via the layer 2 tunnel, the second DHCP Discover message.
QUANCAI discloses inhibiting modifying the second DHCP Discover message; and sending, by the bridged gateway to the first computing device via the layer 2 tunnel, the second DHCP Discover message (preventing a second DHCP Discover message to forward a packet by using preset forwarding rule to force the packet to be forward using an pre-established rule using MAC media access control layer in layer 2, QUANCAI, page 21, paragraph 6 starting with Particularly, to prevent the second…; MAC is disclosed in page 7 last paragraph starting with Further, the forwarding rule includes… ).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate QUANCAI’s teachings with DING’s teachings in view of Jia’s teachings in view of Hedge’s teachings and in view of Pfautz’s teachings and in view of WU’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently not modifying the level of quality of service by preventing any modification of a service quality in a LAN using preset rule.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 12, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is substantially similar to claim 12, thus the same rationale applies.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIEGEORGES A HENRY whose telephone number is (571)270-3226. The examiner can normally be reached on 11:00am -8:00pm East M-F.
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached on 571 272-8365. 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.
/MARIEGEORGES A HENRY/Examiner, Art Unit 2455
/DAVID R LAZARO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights