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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to an amendment/response/communication filed 7/15/2026.
No claims have been cancelled.
No claims have been added.
Claims(s) 1-20 is/are currently pending.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 3/13/2023. These drawings are accepted
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 7/15/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 USC § 103.
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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Torres et al. (US 20140169167 A1) in view of Torres et al. (US 20130136004 A1, hereinafter “Torres2”).
Regarding claim 1, Torres et al. teaches a method of managing queues (paragraphs 22, 108, Teaches a traffic-management method implemented through algorithms and a gateway queuing architecture that manages packet flow and queue servicing) for transmission of protocol data units (PDUs) (paragraphs 21, 111, Teaches managing packet-based protocol data, including TCP and UDP IP packets, through queues before transmission) in a satellite communication system (paragraph 15, Torres expressly implements the disclosed gateway and traffic-management architecture within a satellite communications system having a gateway, satellite, and VSAT terminals), the method comprising: receiving the PDUs at a gateway (paragraphs 19, 108, Teaches receiving IP packet PDUs from the IP gateways at satellite gateway 101 and processing the received packets through the gateway's input architecture), the gateway having a first set of queues (paragraphs 105, 108-109, Teaches a first set of queues at gateway 101 comprising multiple priority queues 705 for holding received packets) each corresponding to a different class of service (CoS) (paragraphs 20, 36, 105, 123, Teaches different traffic/service classes translated into respective priority levels and stored in corresponding RT and NRT priority queues at the gateway) and a second set of queues (paragraphs 109-110, Teaches a second queue structure comprising sets of MODCOD queues within MODCOD groups 711 and 712) each corresponding to a different modulation and coding (Modcod) scheme (paragraphs 110, 114, Torres expressly teaches that the MODCOD queue set contains respective queues representing the different modulation-and-coding schemes supported by the system); loading the PDUs into the first set of queues (paragraphs 108, 112, Teaches loading received packet PDUs into the gateway's RT and NRT priority queues) in accordance with a set of CoS assignments for the PDUs (paragraphs 20, 36, 108, Teaches assigning packets to traffic-class/priority types and using those pre-assigned types to place each packet into its corresponding priority queue); releasing the PDUs from the first set of queues (paragraphs 111, 117, Teaches extracting/dequeuing packet PDUs from the first-set priority queues) into the second set of queues (paragraphs 111, 116, Teaches moving the dequeued packets from the first-set priority queues into the second-set MODCOD queues) in accordance with the allocated available bandwidth (paragraphs 117, 123-124, Teaches controlling the amount dequeued from each priority queue according to its calculated share of the available residual capacity); loading the PDUs into the second set of queues (paragraphs 111, 114-115, Teaches loading packet information into the MODCOD queue structure by sorting packets or their corresponding pointers into the appropriate MODCOD queues) in accordance with a set of Modcod scheme assignments for the PDUs (paragraphs 112, 114-115, Teaches that individual packets have respective MODCOD indicators and are loaded into corresponding MODCOD queues according to those packet-specific modulation-and-coding assignments); and releasing the PDUs from the second set of queues (paragraphs 111, 118, Teaches releasing data from the second-set MODCOD queues to form code blocks and moving those code blocks into the transmission buffer) for transmission (paragraphs 109, 112, Teaches supplying the resulting DVB-S2 code blocks to physical-layer modulator hardware for transmission) in the satellite communication system (paragraphs 16, 21, 109, Teaches transmitting the queue-managed data over the DVB-S2 physical-layer outroute from gateway 101 through the forward uplink to satellite 103).
Torres et al. does not explicitly teach allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues.
However, Torres2 teaches allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues (paragraphs 32, 34, 37, 42-43, 46, 48, teaches the claimed second-set queue functionality through the PHY transmission resources represented by slots whose capacity is determined according to MODCOD, and teaches allocating the available bandwidth associated with those MODCOD-based transmission resources amongst the first-set queues by distributing the available slots among the interactive, streaming, and bulk priority traffic queues based on their respective backlogs and priority allocations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues as taught by Torres2 in the system of Torres et al., so that it would allocate available transmission capacity among different class-of-service queues based on traffic priority and queue demand before packets are transferred to modulation-and-coding queues, thereby improving bandwidth utilization, maintaining quality-of-service differentiation, reducing congestion, and increasing the overall efficiency and fairness of satellite gateway packet scheduling and transmission.
Regarding claim 2, Torres et al. teaches allocating the available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues includes counting a number of guaranteed PDUs that are stored in each of the first set of queues, wherein the available bandwidth in the second set of queues is allocated proportionally amongst the first set of queues based on the number of guaranteed PDUs and their respective sizes in each of the first set of queues (paragraphs 37, 67-68, 71, 103, 123-124, Teaches measuring traffic demand by counting packets and accounting for their sizes, determining the amounts stored in individual priority queues, and proportionally allocating available or residual bandwidth among those queues according to their measured demand and weighting before moving the allocated traffic into the MODCOD queues).
Regarding claim 3, Torres et al. teaches assigning a CoS to each of the PDUs to generate the set of CoS assignments for the PDUs (paragraphs 20, 22, 36, 79, 81, 105, 108, Teaches assigning individual packet PDUs to traffic classes/priorities having associated QoS characteristics, including RT/NRT and interactive, multicast, streaming, and bulk classes, and expressly processes each incoming packet according to its pre-assigned priority type for placement into the corresponding priority queue, thereby generating and applying CoS assignments for the PDUs).
Regarding claim 4, Torres et al. teaches determining applicable service level guarantees for the PDUs (paragraphs 74, 77-78, 81-84, 95-96, Teaches determining the applicable service-level guarantees for the PDUs by identifying the service plan/rate plan and QoS requirements applicable to the traffic and using those parameters to establish plan-based maximum rates, throughput limits, and scheduling treatment for the PDUs).
Regarding claim 5, Torres et al. teaches the applicable service level guarantees for the PDUs are determined based on MEF Carrier Ethernet service definitions (paragraphs 64, 74, 77-78, 81-84, 95, 104, 113, Teaches determining and enforcing applicable service-level guarantees for packet traffic through predefined service/rate plans and QoS parameters including priority weighting, maximum and throttled rates, throughput limits, and delay/jitter requirements that govern bandwidth allocation and scheduling of the PDUs).
Regarding claim 6, Torres et al. teaches determining the available bandwidth in the second set of queues based on a number of the PDUs and their respective sizes that are stored in each of the second set of queues (paragraphs 24-26, 28, 32, 106, 114, 118, Teaches determining available bandwidth/capacity for the MODCOD queues by collecting statistics identifying the number of code blocks associated with the respective MODCOD types and accounting for the amount/size of data represented by those code blocks, including their information-bit content, to calculate the available transmission capacity).
Regarding claim 7, Torres et al. teaches assigning a Modcod scheme to each of the PDUs to generate the set of Modcod scheme assignments for the PDUs, wherein each of the set of Modcod scheme assignments includes one or both of a modulation scheme assignment or a coding rate assignment (paragraphs 26, 28, 88, 114, 120, Teaches that each MODCOD type/scheme specifies modulation and coding-rate characteristics, expressly exemplified by MODCODs such as 3/4 QPSK, 4/5 QPSK, and 1/2 QPSK, thereby providing assignments comprising a modulation scheme and a coding rate).
Regarding claim 8, Torres et al. teaches the set of Modcod scheme assignments are generated based on an estimated signal-to-noise ratio of a communication channel between the gateway and one or more terminals (paragraphs 23-24, 78, 82-83, 88-89, 112, 114-115, Teaches determining and using different MODCODs for remote VSATs according to physical-layer/channel conditions, assigning each packet a MODCOD indicator reflecting the channel condition at its destination VSAT, and using that indicator to place the packet into the corresponding MODCOD queue, thereby generating MODCOD scheme assignments based on an estimate of communication-channel quality between the gateway and the terminal).
Regarding claim 9, Torres et al. teaches after releasing the PDUs from the second set of queues, encapsulating the PDUs to produce baseband frames (paragraphs 109, 111-114, 118, Teaches that after packet data is serviced through the MODCOD queues, the data is moved from the MODCOD groups and packed together according to MODCOD into DVB-S2 code blocks for placement in the code block buffer and subsequent physical-layer transmission, thereby teaching encapsulating the released PDUs to produce baseband frames).
Regarding claim 10, Torres et al. teaches modulating the baseband frames to produce digital waveforms; digitizing the digital waveforms to produce analog signals; and transmitting the analog signals to one or more terminals via a satellite (paragraphs 16-18, 21, Teaches transmitting signals from the gateway through the RFT over a forward uplink to the satellite, which forwards the signals over a forward downlink as RF signals to one or more VSAT terminals).
Regarding claim 11, Torres et al. teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations for managing queues for transmission of protocol data units (PDUs) in a satellite communication system (Paragraphs 22-23, 104, 108, Teaches software/algorithms implemented at the satellite gateway for managing traffic and servicing queues, including software that receives packets and places them into appropriate queues), the operations comprising: receiving the PDUs at a gateway (Paragraphs 19, 21, 105, 108, Teaches receiving packetized traffic at gateway 101 from the IP gateways and processing that traffic at the gateway before satellite transmission), the gateway having a first set of queues each corresponding to a different class of service (CoS) (Paragraphs 20, 36, 55, 105, 112, Teaches multiple gateway priority queues corresponding to differentiated traffic classes, with traffic classes translated into respective priority levels and placed into their associated queues) and a second set of queues each corresponding to a different modulation and coding (Modcod) scheme (Paragraphs 106, 110, 114, Torres expressly teaches sets of MODCOD queues in which the individual queues correspond to respective modulation-and-coding schemes supported by the satellite system); loading the PDUs into the first set of queues in accordance with a set of CoS assignments for the PDUs (Paragraphs 20, 105, 108, Teaches classifying packets according to pre-assigned traffic priority/class and loading those packets into the corresponding gateway priority queues); releasing the PDUs from the first set of queues (Paragraphs 52, 111, 115, Teaches extracting/dequeuing packets from the gateway priority queues for placement into the downstream MODCOD queues) into the second set of queues in accordance with the allocated available bandwidth (Paragraphs 116, 122-125, Teaches determining available residual capacity and using that available capacity to control how much data is released from the priority queues into the MODCOD queue groups); loading the PDUs into the second set of queues in accordance with a set of Modcod scheme assignments for the PDUs (Paragraphs 111-112, 114-115, Teaches assigning each packet a MODCOD indicator and using that indicator/MODCOD type to load the packet or its pointer into the corresponding MODCOD queue); and releasing the PDUs from the second set of queues (Paragraphs 24, 118, Teaches releasing data accumulated in the MODCOD queues to form code blocks that are moved into the downstream code block buffer) for transmission in the satellite communication system (Paragraphs 16, 21, 109, 112-113, Teaches moving the queued packet data into DVB-S2 code blocks for physical-layer transmission from gateway 101 over the forward uplink to satellite 103).
Torres et al. does not explicitly teach allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues.
However, Torres2 teaches allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues (paragraphs 32, 34, 37, 42-43, 46, 48, teaches the claimed second-set queue functionality through the PHY transmission resources represented by slots whose capacity is determined according to MODCOD, and teaches allocating the available bandwidth associated with those MODCOD-based transmission resources amongst the first-set queues by distributing the available slots among the interactive, streaming, and bulk priority traffic queues based on their respective backlogs and priority allocations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues as taught by Torres2 in the system of Torres et al., so that it would allocate available transmission capacity among different class-of-service queues based on traffic priority and queue demand before packets are transferred to modulation-and-coding queues, thereby improving bandwidth utilization, maintaining quality-of-service differentiation, reducing congestion, and increasing the overall efficiency and fairness of satellite gateway packet scheduling and transmission.
Regarding claim 12, Torres et al. teaches allocating the available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues includes counting a number of guaranteed PDUs and their respective sizes that are stored in each of the first set of queues, wherein the available bandwidth in the second set of queues is allocated proportionally amongst the first set of queues based on the number of guaranteed PDUs and their respective sizes in each of the first set of queues (paragraphs 37, 67-68, 71, 103, 123-124, Teaches measuring traffic demand by counting packets and accounting for their sizes, determining the amounts stored in individual priority queues, and proportionally allocating available or residual bandwidth among those queues according to their measured demand and weighting before moving the allocated traffic into the MODCOD queues).
Regarding claim 13, Torres et al. teaches assigning a CoS to each of the PDUs to generate the set of CoS assignments for the PDUs (paragraphs 20, 22, 36, 79, 81, 105, 108, Teaches assigning individual packet PDUs to traffic classes/priorities having associated QoS characteristics, including RT/NRT and interactive, multicast, streaming, and bulk classes, and expressly processes each incoming packet according to its pre-assigned priority type for placement into the corresponding priority queue, thereby generating and applying CoS assignments for the PDUs).
Regarding claim 14, Torres et al. teaches determining the available bandwidth in the second set of queues based on a number of the PDUs and their respective sizes that are stored in each of the second set of queues (paragraphs 24-26, 28, 30, 114, 118, Teaches determining available bandwidth/capacity using statistics collected for the individual MODCOD queues, including the number K_i of code blocks associated with each MODCOD type and the amount/size of information represented by those code blocks, while expressly identifying the MODCOD queues as separate queues corresponding to respective modulation-and-coding schemes and tracking whether sufficient data has accumulated in each queue to form a code block).
Regarding claim 15, Torres et al. teaches assigning a Modcod scheme to each of the PDUs to generate the set of Modcod scheme assignments for the PDUs, wherein each of the set of Modcod scheme assignments includes one or both of a modulation scheme assignment or a coding rate assignment (paragraphs 26, 28, 88, 114, 120, Teaches that each MODCOD type/scheme specifies modulation and coding-rate characteristics, expressly exemplified by MODCODs such as 3/4 QPSK, 4/5 QPSK, and 1/2 QPSK, thereby providing assignments comprising a modulation scheme and a coding rate).
Regarding claim 16, Torres et al. teaches the set of Modcod scheme assignments are generated based on an estimated signal-to-noise ratio of a communication channel between the gateway and one or more terminals (paragraphs 23-24, 78, 82-83, 88-89, 112, 114-115, Teaches determining and using different MODCODs for remote VSATs according to physical-layer/channel conditions, assigning each packet a MODCOD indicator reflecting the channel condition at its destination VSAT, and using that indicator to place the packet into the corresponding MODCOD queue, thereby generating MODCOD scheme assignments based on an estimate of communication-channel quality between the gateway and the terminal).
Regarding claim 17, Torres et al. teaches after releasing the PDUs from the second set of queues, encapsulating the PDUs to produce baseband frames (paragraphs 109, 111-114, 118, Teaches that after packet data is serviced through the MODCOD queues, the data is moved from the MODCOD groups and packed together according to MODCOD into DVB-S2 code blocks for placement in the code block buffer and subsequent physical-layer transmission, thereby teaching encapsulating the released PDUs to produce baseband frames).
Regarding claim 18, Torres et al. teaches modulating the baseband frames to produce digital waveforms; digitizing the digital waveforms to produce analog signals; and transmitting the analog signals to one or more terminals via a satellite (paragraphs 16-18, 21, Teaches transmitting signals from the gateway through the RFT over a forward uplink to the satellite, which forwards the signals over a forward downlink as RF signals to one or more VSAT terminals).
Regarding claim 19, Torres et al. teaches a system comprising: one or more processors; and a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations for managing queues for transmission of protocol data units (PDUs) in a satellite communication system (paragraphs 15, 22-23, 51, 104, 108-109, Teaches a satellite communication system having a gateway implementing hardware/software processing modules and software threads that execute traffic-management, bandwidth-allocation, queue-servicing, packet-processing, and DVB-S2 transmission operations), the operations comprising: receiving the PDUs at a gateway (Paragraphs 19, 21, 105, 108, Teaches receiving packetized traffic at gateway 101 from the IP gateways and processing that traffic at the gateway before satellite transmission), the gateway having a first set of queues each corresponding to a different class of service (CoS) (Paragraphs 20, 36, 55, 105, 112, Teaches multiple gateway priority queues corresponding to differentiated traffic classes, with traffic classes translated into respective priority levels and placed into their associated queues) and a second set of queues each corresponding to a different modulation and coding (Modcod) scheme (Paragraphs 106, 110, 114, Torres expressly teaches sets of MODCOD queues in which the individual queues correspond to respective modulation-and-coding schemes supported by the satellite system); loading the PDUs into the first set of queues in accordance with a set of CoS assignments for the PDUs (Paragraphs 20, 105, 108, Teaches classifying packets according to pre-assigned traffic priority/class and loading those packets into the corresponding gateway priority queues); releasing the PDUs from the first set of queues (Paragraphs 52, 111, 115, Teaches extracting/dequeuing packets from the gateway priority queues for placement into the downstream MODCOD queues) into the second set of queues in accordance with the allocated available bandwidth (Paragraphs 116, 122-125, Teaches determining available residual capacity and using that available capacity to control how much data is released from the priority queues into the MODCOD queue groups); loading the PDUs into the second set of queues in accordance with a set of Modcod scheme assignments for the PDUs (Paragraphs 111-112, 114-115, Teaches assigning each packet a MODCOD indicator and using that indicator/MODCOD type to load the packet or its pointer into the corresponding MODCOD queue); and releasing the PDUs from the second set of queues (Paragraphs 24, 118, Teaches releasing data accumulated in the MODCOD queues to form code blocks that are moved into the downstream code block buffer) for transmission in the satellite communication system (Paragraphs 16, 21, 109, 112-113, Teaches moving the queued packet data into DVB-S2 code blocks for physical-layer transmission from gateway 101 over the forward uplink to satellite 103).
Torres et al. does not explicitly teach allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues.
However, Torres2 teaches allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues (paragraphs 32, 34, 37, 42-43, 46, 48, teaches the claimed second-set queue functionality through the PHY transmission resources represented by slots whose capacity is determined according to MODCOD, and teaches allocating the available bandwidth associated with those MODCOD-based transmission resources amongst the first-set queues by distributing the available slots among the interactive, streaming, and bulk priority traffic queues based on their respective backlogs and priority allocations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide allocating an available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues as taught by Torres2 in the system of Torres et al., so that it would allocate available transmission capacity among different class-of-service queues based on traffic priority and queue demand before packets are transferred to modulation-and-coding queues, thereby improving bandwidth utilization, maintaining quality-of-service differentiation, reducing congestion, and increasing the overall efficiency and fairness of satellite gateway packet scheduling and transmission.
Regarding claim 20, Torres et al. teaches allocating the available bandwidth in the second set of queues amongst the first set of queues includes counting a number of guaranteed PDUs that are stored in each of the first set of queues, wherein the available bandwidth in the second set of queues is allocated proportionally amongst the first set of queues based on the number of guaranteed PDUs and their respective sizes in each of the first set of queues (paragraphs 37, 67-68, 71, 103, 123-124, Teaches measuring traffic demand by counting packets and accounting for their sizes, determining the amounts stored in individual priority queues, and proportionally allocating available or residual bandwidth among those queues according to their measured demand and weighting before moving the allocated traffic into the MODCOD queues).
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 ANDREW SHAJI KURIAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1878. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm.
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.
/A.S.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2464
/MICHAEL K PHILLIPS/Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Prosecution Insights