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 .
General Remarks
This communication is considered fully responsive to Applicant’s response filed on 12/16/2025.
Application filed 11/20/2023
Applicant’s PgPUB: 2024/0089214
Claims:
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1 and 13 are independent.
IDS:
Previous IDS:
IDS filed 11/14/2024 has been considered.
Continuity/Priority Data:
This Application is a Continuation of International Application PCT/CN2021/140398 filed on 12/22/2021.
This Application claims priority to Chinese Application No. CN20210559029.3 filed on 05/21/2021.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s response, filed 12/16/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive to overcome the prior rejection. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0179476 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”).
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 6, 8, 12, 13, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0312816 A1 to Shen et al. (“Shen”) in view of International Application Publication No. WO 2020/011102 to Sun et al. (“Sun”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0179476 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”).
As to claim 1, Shen discloses:
a data processing method, comprising:
sending, by a network device, a pause message to an upstream device in response to a determination that a target buffer that is corresponding to a target priority and that is on the network device reaches or exceeds a first threshold (¶0004, ¶0007 – Shen teaches sending a back pressure message, based on a preset condition (i.e., threshold) when there is congestion to instruct an upstream device to pause sending of the key flow; ¶0086 – Shen teaches the conversion of back pressure frame into a pause frame of a standard PFC (i.e., priority-based control flow)), wherein the pause message indicates to the upstream device to stop sending a first data packet corresponding to the target priority (¶0004, ¶0013 – the back pressure message (i.e., pause message) is use to pause/stop sending key flow to a device); and
sending, by the network device, a sending resumption message to the upstream device in response to a determination that a duration in which the network device stops buffering a second data packet is greater than a preset duration (¶0065 – Shen teaches after sending of the key flow is paused for a period of time, when the first switching device is in a non-congested state, the second switching device can continue to send the key flow to the first switching device, and may send a cancel back pressure frame to an upstream device of the key flow.), and that the target buffer falls back below a second threshold (¶0061 – Shen teaches when a data amount of packets in a send queue corresponding to the key flow does not exceed a first preset threshold, the first switching device generates a cancel back pressure message (i.e., resume message.)), wherein the sending resumption message indicates to the upstream device to send a third data packet corresponding to the target priority to the network device (Fig. 4, ¶0061-¶0065 – Shen teaches resending key flow (408) (i.e. third packet)), and the second data packet is a data packet that is buffered after the network device sends the pause message and before the network device sends the sending resumption message and that is corresponding to the target priority (¶0015 – Shen teaches when the second switching device does not receive a cancel back pressure message, the second switching device continues to send the key flow to the first switching device. Even if a cancel back pressure frame is lost in a transmission process, the second switching device may continue to send the key flow to the first switching device. Examiner Note: Shen shows the sending of data packets between a pause and a resume message. And data is stored in send queues by the first switching device which what is used to determine congestion.).
Sun discloses what Shen does not expressly disclose. However, Shen does teach that after Device-A receives a back pressure message (i.e., pause) that sets a pause duration timer from Device-B, where the timing duration of the timer is not less than a preset duration and when Device-A does not receive a cancel back pressure message (i.e., resumption), Device-A can send key flow to Device-B (¶0015 of Shen)
Sun discloses:
the second data packet is a data packet that is buffered after the network device sends the pause message and before the network device sends the sending resumption message and that is corresponding to the target priority (0189-0191 – Sun teaches sending a flight packet (i.e., packet after a pause message) that is then later buffered by the receiving queue.)
Shen and Sun are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to managing packet flow.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate finishing sending of message after a pause as discussed in Sun with a data processing method as discussed in Shen by adding the functionality of Sun to the system/method of Shen in order to provide during a time period, the sending queue of the switching device A continues to send a packet that sends the data flow to the switching device B and buffered before the pause takes effect (Sun, ¶0189).
Kim discloses what Shen and Sun do not expressly disclose. However, Shen does teach that after sending of the key flow is paused for a period of time, when the first switching device is in a non-congested state, the second switching device can continue to send the key flow to the first switching device, and may send a cancel back pressure frame to an upstream device of the key flow (¶0065). Sun teaches the first node determines that a duration of pausing transmission of a packet on the first queue and a packet on a second queue is greater than or equal to a duration indicated by the pause frame, and the first node restores transmission of a packet on the first queue and the second queue (¶0026).
Kim discloses:
sending, by the network device, a sending resumption message to the upstream device in response to a determination that a duration after the network device completes buffering a second data packet is greater than a preset duration (Fig. 10, ¶0069-¶0072 – Kim teaches sending an UNPAUSE frame (i.e., resumption message) after a the expiration of a timer (i.e., preset duration) and checking it against threshold levels.)
Shen, Sun and Kim are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to managing packet flow.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate use of a timer initiated resumption message as discussed in Kim with finishing sending of message after a pause as discussed in Sun with a data processing method as discussed in Shen by adding the functionality of Sun to the system/method of Shen in order to provide a timer and queue check to determine if messages should resume (Kim, ¶0070).
As to claim 6, Shen, Sun and Kim discloses:
data processing method according to claim 1, and
Shen discloses:
wherein after the sending, by a network device, a pause message to an upstream device, the data processing method further comprises:
starting, by the network device, a first timer when receiving the second data packet (¶0015 – Shen teaches that after the receiving, by a second switching device, a back pressure message sent by a first switching device, the second switching device starts a timer based on the back pressure message; and when timing duration of the timer is not less than preset duration, the second switching device extracts the packet of the key flow from the buffer corresponding to the key flow virtual channel.); and
determining, by the network device in response to a duration recorded by the first timer being greater than the preset duration, that the duration in which the network device stops buffering the second data packet is greater than the preset duration (¶0015 – Shen teaches that after the receiving, by a second switching device, a back pressure message sent by a first switching device, the second switching device starts a timer based on the back pressure message; and when timing duration of the timer is not less than preset duration, the second switching device extracts the packet of the key flow from the buffer corresponding to the key flow virtual channel.).
As to claim 8, Shen, Sun and Kim discloses:
data processing method according to claim 1, and
Shen discloses:
wherein after the sending, by a network device, a pause message to an upstream device (¶0015 – Shen teaches that after the receiving, by a second switching device, a back pressure message sent by a first switching device, the second switching device starts a timer based on the back pressure message; and when timing duration of the timer is not less than preset duration, the second switching device extracts the packet of the key flow from the buffer corresponding to the key flow virtual channel.), the data processing method further comprises:
receiving, by the network device, the second data packet from the upstream device (¶0015 – Shen teaches that after the receiving, by a second switching device, a back pressure message sent by a first switching device, the second switching device starts a timer based on the back pressure message; and when timing duration of the timer is not less than preset duration, the second switching device extracts the packet of the key flow from the buffer corresponding to the key flow virtual channel.); and
determining, by the network device in response to a difference between a current moment and a receiving moment of the second data packet being greater than the preset duration, that the duration in which the network device stops buffering the second data packet is greater than the preset duration (¶0015 – Shen teaches that after the receiving, by a second switching device, a back pressure message sent by a first switching device, the second switching device starts a timer based on the back pressure message; and when timing duration of the timer is not less than preset duration, the second switching device extracts the packet of the key flow from the buffer corresponding to the key flow virtual channel.).
As to claim 12, Shen, Sun and Kim discloses:
data processing method according to claim 1, and
Shen discloses:
further comprising:
in response to at least one of the duration in which the network device stops buffering the second data packet being less than or equal to the preset duration, or the target buffer being greater than the second threshold, stopping, by the network device, sending the sending resumption message to the upstream device (¶0004, ¶0007 – Shen teaches sending a back pressure message (i.e., pause message), based on a preset condition (i.e., threshold) when there is congestion to instruct an upstream device to pause sending of the key flow; ¶0086 – Shen teaches the conversion of back pressure frame into a pause frame of a standard PFC (i.e., priority-based control flow)).
As to claim 13, similar rejection as to claim 1.
As to claim 18, similar rejection as to claim 6.
As to claim 20, similar rejection as to claim 8.
Claims 2 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0312816 A1 to Shen et al. (“Shen”) in view of International Application Publication No. WO 2020/011102 to Sun et al. (“Sun”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0179476 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0328918 A1 to Yang et al. (“Yang”).
As to claim 2, Shen, Sun and Kim discloses:
data processing method according to claim 1, and
wherein before the sending, by a network device, a pause message to an upstream device, the data processing method further comprises:
receiving, by the network device, a target data packet sent by the upstream device, wherein the target data packet is corresponding to the target priority (Fig. 1 of Shen); and
Yang discloses what Shen, Sun and Kim does not expressly disclose.
Yang discloses:
determining, by the network device according to an equal-cost multi-path routing (ECMP) policy, a first outgoing interface corresponding to the target data packet in response to the target data packet being a first data packet, wherein the first data packet is a first one of data packets that is corresponding to a target data flow in the target priority and that is received by the network device (¶0141 – Yang teaches a network device determines a route used to forward the first packet in the ECMP group according to the load balancing policy, and forwards the first packet based on the determined route.).
Shen, Sun, Kim and Yang are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to managing packet flow.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate ECMP as discussed in Yang with timer initiated resumption message as discussed in Kim with finishing sending of message after a pause as discussed in Sun with a data processing method as discussed in Shen by adding the functionality of Yang to the system/method of Shen, Sun and Kim in order to ensure normal packet forwarding (Yang, ¶0008).
As to claim 14, similar rejection as to claim 2.
Claims 3 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0312816 A1 to Shen et al. (“Shen”) in view of International Application Publication No. WO 2020/011102 to Sun et al. (“Sun”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0179476 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0328918 A1 to Yang et al. (“Yang”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0172220 A1 to Hao (“Hao”).
As to claim 3, Shen, Sun, Kim and Yang discloses:
data processing method according to claim 2, and
Hao discloses what Shen, Sun and Yang do not expressly discloses.
Hao discloses:
wherein after the determining a first outgoing interface corresponding to the target data packet, the data processing method further comprises:
sending, by the network device, the target data packet through the first outgoing interface in response to the target buffer being less than the first threshold (¶0018, ¶0023 – Hao teaches using a threshold to determine whether to send or suspend sending of packets via I/F).
Shen, Sun, Kim, Yang and Hao are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to managing packet flow.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate conditional packet transmission as discussed in Hao with ECMP as discussed in Yang with timer initiated resumption message as discussed in Kim with finishing sending of message after a pause as discussed in Sun with a data processing method as discussed in Shen by adding the functionality of Hao to the system/method of Shen, Sun, Kim and Yang in order to provide a level of assurance meet the QoS requirements of a network (Yang, ¶0007).
As to claim 15, similar rejection as to claim 3.
Claims 4, 5, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0312816 A1 to Shen et al. (“Shen”) in view of International Application Publication No. WO 2020/011102 to Sun et al. (“Sun”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0179476 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0328918 A1 to Yang et al. (“Yang”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0127797 to Attar et al. (“Attar”).
As to claim 4, Shen, Sun, Kim and Yang discloses:
data processing method according to claim 2,
Attar discloses what Shen, Sun, Kim and Yang does not expressly disclose.
Attar discloses:
wherein in response to the target data packet not being the first data packet, the data processing method further comprises:
determining, by the network device, a time interval between receiving the target data packet and receiving a previous data packet of the target data packet, wherein the previous data packet is corresponding to the target data flow in the target priority (¶0076 – Attar teaches flow may be ascertained by comparing a time of receipt (e.g., a time stamp) of the two sequentially received packets. The presence of less than a pre-defined time delay between the two packets results in the two packets being grouped in the same flowlet of packets); and
in response to the time interval being greater than a flowlet gap time, determining, by the network device, that the target data packet and the previous data packet belong to different flowlets, and forwarding, by the network device, the target data packet through a second outgoing interface; or
in response to the time interval being less than or equal to a flowlet gap time, determining, by the network device, that the target data packet and the previous data packet belong to a same flowlet (¶0076 – Attar teaches flow may be ascertained by comparing a time of receipt (e.g., a time stamp) of the two sequentially received packets. The presence of less than a pre-defined time delay between the two packets results in the two packets being grouped in the same flowlet of packets).
Shen, Sun, Kim, Yang and Attar are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to managing packet flow.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate grouped packet flows as discussed in Attar with ECMP as discussed in Yang with timer initiated resumption message as discussed in Kim with finishing sending of message after a pause as discussed in Sun with a data processing method as discussed in Shen by adding the functionality of Attar to the system/method of Shen, Sun, Kim and Yang in order to determine the proper flowlet in which to send a packet (Attar, ¶0024).
As to claim 5, Shen, Sun, Kim, Yang and Attar discloses:
data processing method according to claim 4, and
Shen discloses:
wherein after determining, by the network device, that the target data packet and the previous data packet belong to the same flowlet (¶0076 – Attar teaches flow may be ascertained by comparing a time of receipt (e.g., a time stamp) of the two sequentially received packets. The presence of less than a pre-defined time delay between the two packets results in the two packets being grouped in the same flowlet of packets), the data processing method further comprises:
forwarding, by the network device, the third data packet through a third outgoing interface corresponding to the previous data packet in response to the target buffer being less than the first threshold (Fig. 4, Fig. 20, ¶0061-¶0065 – Shen teaches resending key flow (408) (i.e. third packet)).
As to claim 16, similar rejection as to claim 4.
As to claim 17, similar rejection as to claim 5.
Claims 7, 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0312816 A1 to Shen et al. (“Shen”) in view of International Application Publication No. WO 2020/011102 to Sun et al. (“Sun”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0179476 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0258850 to Mayya et al. (“Mayya”).
As to claim 7, Shen, Sun and Kim discloses:
data processing method according to claim 1, and
wherein the data processing method further comprises:
starting, by the network device, a second timer when sending the pause message to the upstream device (¶0004, ¶0013 – Shen teaches the back pressure message (i.e., pause message) is use to pause/stop sending key flow to a device); and
Mayya discloses what Shen, Sun and Kim does not expressly disclose.
Mayya discloses:
determining, by the network device in response to a duration recorded by the second timer being greater than a flowlet gap time, that the duration in which the network device stops buffering the second data packet is greater than the preset duration (Fig. 7, ¶0045 – Mayya teaches comparing a timer to a threshold and dropping packets (i.e., stop buffering) until timer is greater than a threshold).
Shen, Sun, Kim and Mayya are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to managing packet flow.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate packet management as discussed in Mayya with timer initiated resumption message as discussed in Kim with finishing sending of message after a pause as discussed in Sun with a data processing method as discussed in Shen by adding the functionality of Mayya to the system/method of Shen, Sun and Kim in order to alleviate network congestion (Mayya, ¶0012).
As to claim 9, Shen, Sun and Kim discloses:
data processing method according to claim 1,
Mayya discloses what Shen, Sun and Kim does not expressly disclose.
Mayya discloses:
wherein the data processing method further comprises:
determining, by the network device in response to a difference between a current moment and a moment at which the network device sends the pause message to the upstream device being greater than a flowlet gap time, that the duration in which the network device stops buffering the second data packet is greater than the preset duration (Fig. 7, ¶0045 – Mayya teaches comparing a timer to a threshold and dropping packets (i.e., stop buffering) until timer is greater than a threshold). The suggestion/motivation and obviousness rejection is the same as in claim 8.
As to claim 19, similar rejection as to claim 7.
Claims 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0312816 A1 to Shen et al. (“Shen”) in view of International Application Publication No. WO 2020/011102 to Sun et al. (“Sun”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0179476 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0172220 to Chung et al. (“Chung”).
As to claim 10, Shen, Sun and Kim discloses:
data processing method according to claim 1,
Chung discloses what Shen, Sun and Kim does not expressly disclose.
Chung discloses:
wherein the preset duration comprises:
a difference between a flowlet gap time and in-flight duration, wherein the in-flight duration is a maximum value of a difference between a first moment and a second moment, the first moment is a moment at which the network device sends the pause message to the upstream device, and the second moment is a moment at which the network device receives the second data packet (¶0071 – Chung teaches a WLAN terminal 20 can transmit the packet to the AP 10 during the count to the pause time when the destination of the packet is in the internal network. When the pause frame is received from the AP after the packet whose destination is in the internal network is transmitted, the WLAN terminal 20 transmits all packets after the count to the pause time is finished.).
Shen, Sun, Kim and Chung are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to managing packet flow.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a pause frame as discussed in Chung with timer initiated resumption message as discussed in Kim with finishing sending of message after a pause as discussed in Sun with a data processing method as discussed in Shen by adding the functionality of Chung to the system/method of Shen, Sun and Kim in order to provide packet flow control within a WLAN to reduce dissipation and packet loss (Chung, ¶0024).
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0312816 A1 to Shen et al. (“Shen”) in view of International Application Publication No. WO 2020/011102 to Sun et al. (“Sun”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0179476 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) in further view of in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0127797 to Attar et al. (“Attar”).
As to claim 11, Shen, Sun and Kim discloses:
data processing method according to claim 1, and
wherein after the sending, by the network device, a sending resumption message to the upstream device, the data processing method further comprises:
receiving, by the network device, the third data packet from the upstream device (Fig. 1, Fig. 4, ¶0065 – Shen teaches after sending of the key flow is paused for a period of time, when the first switching device is in a non-congested state, the second switching device can continue to send the key flow to the first switching device, and may send a cancel back pressure frame to an upstream device of the key flow.); and
Attar discloses what Shen, Sun and Kim does not expressly disclose.
Attar discloses:
determining, by the network device, that the third data packet and the first data packet or the second data packet belong to different flowlets (¶0045 – Yuan teaches If an arrival time difference between two packets is greater than a configured value … a latter packet may be used as a first packet of a new flowlet; ¶0076 – Attar teaches the pre-defined time delay between the two packets may result in the two packets being grouped in two different flowlets).
Shen, Sun, Kim and Attar are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to managing packet flow.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate grouped packet flows as discussed in Attar with timer initiated resumption message as discussed in Kim with finishing sending of message after a pause as discussed in Sun with a data processing method as discussed in Shen by adding the functionality of Attar to the system/method of Shen, Sun and Kim in order to determine the proper flowlet in which to send a packet (Attar, ¶0024).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAYLOR A ELFERVIG whose telephone number is (571)270-5687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday (10:00 AM CST) - Friday (4:00 PM CST).
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, Oscar Louie can be reached at (571) 270-1684. 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.
/TAYLOR A ELFERVIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445