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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on January 16, 2026 has been received and entered.
Applicant’s Amendments to the Claims have been received and acknowledged.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 1/16/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 12,499,075 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/25/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 1, line 4, “the network” lacks proper antecedent basis since it was not mentioned previously. Examiner suggests amending to “the lossy Ethernet network”. Similar problems exist in claims 7 and 13.
The term “sufficient” in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “sufficient” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Paragraph [0391] of Specification discloses examples and relative terminology such as “limited”, “some”, “normal” and “nominal”. The “relevant definition” is composed of indefinite terms such as “can”, “allow”, as well as another relative phrase in “normal Active operation with nominal impact on transmission rate”. Similar problems exist in claim 8.
In claims 6, 12, and 18, line 1, “the end of a range of holes” lacks proper antecedent basis since it was not mentioned previously.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Menachem et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0004705 A1), hereafter referred to as Menachem’705.
Referring to claim 1, Menachem’705 as claimed, a remote direct memory access (RDMA) network interface controller (NIC) for connection to a lossy Ethernet network to communicate with a remote RDMA NIC by exchanging packets with the remote RDMA NIC (network interface controller (NIC) transmitting RDMA data transfer transaction, see para. [0011], Figs. 1 and 2), the RDMA NIC comprising: a network interface for connection to the network (communication via network 28, see paras. [0023], [0024], Figs. 1 and 2); an RDMA NIC processor coupled to the network interface (NIC including packet processing logic with ACK/NAK processor, see Fig. 2 and paras. [0029]-[0032]); RDMA packet processing logic which controls reception of packets from and transmission of packets to the network interface (packet processing logic receives/generates/processes data packets to/from network, see Fig. 2 and paras. [0029]-[0032]); RDMA NIC memory coupled to the RDMA NIC processor, the RDMA packet processing logic and the network interface, the RDMA NIC memory including: buffer storage for storing packets (NIC including send/receive pipe for transmitting/receiving data packets, see Fig. 2 and paras. [0029]-[0032]); and RDMA NIC non-transitory storage for programs to execute from the RDMA NIC memory on the RDMA NIC processor, wherein the RDMA packet processing logic is configured to detect the reception of a packet indicating that the remote RDMA NIC has depleted out-of-order tracking resources (acknowledgment engine will recognize the occurrence of an OOS event, see para. [0031] and Fig. 2) and, in response to that detection, stop transmitting new packets to the network interface (retransmit the packet or packets indicated, without retransmitting the given packet and other later packets in the sequence, see paras. [0020], [0022], and [0025]; also note: delay transmission of packet, see para. [0031]).
As to claim 2, Menachem’705 also discloses the RDMA packet processing logic is further configured to detect a packet indicating that sufficient out-of-order tracking resources have been recovered and, in response to that detection, resume transmitting new packets to the network interface (identify multiple packets that were not received, retransmitting the packets that have not been received and resuming transmission of the sequence of packets at a point following the identified most recent packet to complete the RDMA operation, see paras. [0025], [0032], [0036]).
As to claim 3, Menachem’705 also discloses the packet indicating that out-of-order tracking resources have been recovered indicates that all out-of-order tracking resources have been recovered (identify the packets that were not received, retransmitting the packets that have not been received and resuming transmission of the sequence of packets at a point following the identified most recent packet to complete the RDMA operation, see paras. [0025], [0032], [0036]).
As to claim 4, Menachem’705 also discloses the RDMA packet processing logic is configured to detect reception of a packet indicating existence of a new hole at the remote RDMA NIC and specifying the packet of the new hole, and wherein the RDMA packet processing logic is configured to retransmit packets indicated by the new hole indication packet after reception of the depleted out-of-order resources packet (identify the packets that were not received, retransmitting the packet(s) that have not been received and resuming transmission of the sequence of packets at a point following the identified most recent packet to complete the RDMA operation, see paras. [0025], [0032], [0036]).
As to claim 5, Menachem’705 also discloses the indicated new hole is a singular new hole (identify the packet(s) that were not received, retransmitting the packets that have not been received and resuming transmission of the sequence of packets at a point following the identified most recent packet to complete the RDMA operation, see paras. [0025], [0032], [0036]).
As to claim 6, Menachem’705 also discloses the indicated new hole is the end of a range of holes (identify the packet(s) that were not received, retransmitting the packets that have not been received and resuming transmission of the sequence of packets at a point following the identified most recent packet to complete the RDMA operation, see paras. [0025], [0032], [0036]).
Referring to claim 7, Menachem’705 as claimed, a computer system (computing system 20 in which host computers 22, 24, 26 communicate via a packet network, see para. [0023] and Fig. 1) comprising: a computer including: a computer processor; a memory controller coupled to the computer processor; (each computer 22, 24, 26 comprises a host processing subsystem 30 comprising a host processor, and memory, and is coupled to network 28 by a respective NIC 32 or 34, see para. [0023] and Fig. 1) computer memory coupled to the computer processor and the memory controller; a computer peripheral device interface (computer system has various interfaces/bus for components communication) coupled to the computer processor and to the computer memory; and computer non-transitory storage for programs to execute from computer memory on the computer processor; and a remote direct memory access (RDMA) network interface controller (NIC) for connection to a lossy Ethernet network to communicate with a remote RDMA NIC by exchanging packets with the remote RDMA NIC (network interface controller (NIC) transmitting RDMA data transfer transaction, see para. [0011], Figs. 1 and 2), the RDMA NIC including: an RDMA NIC peripheral device interface for connection to the computer; a network interface for connection to the network (communication via network 28, see paras. [0023], [0024], Figs. 1 and 2); an RDMA NIC processor coupled to the network interface (NIC including packet processing logic with ACK/NAK processor, see Fig. 2 and paras. [0029]-[0032]); RDMA packet processing logic which controls reception of packets from and transmission of packets to the network interface (packet processing logic receives/generates/processes data packets to/from network, see Fig. 2 and paras. [0029]-[0032]); RDMA NIC memory coupled to the RDMA NIC processor, the RDMA packet processing logic and the network interface, the RDMA NIC memory including: buffer storage for storing received and to be transmitted packets (NIC including send/receive pipe for transmitting/receiving data packets, see Fig. 2 and paras. [0029]-[0032]); and RDMA NIC non-transitory storage for programs to execute from the RDMA NIC memory on the RDMA NIC processor, the RDMA NIC non-transitory storage including RDMA packet processing programs for cooperating with the RDMA packet processing logic to perform transmission and reception of packets, wherein the RDMA packet processing logic is configured to detect the reception of a packet indicating that the remote RDMA NIC has depleted out-of-order tracking resources (acknowledgment engine will recognize the occurrence of an OOS event, see para. [0031] and Fig. 2) and, in response to that detection, stop transmitting new packets to the network interface (retransmit the packet or packets indicated, without retransmitting the given packet and other later packets in the sequence, see paras. [0020], [0022], and [0025]; also note: delay transmission of packet, see para. [0031]).
Note claims 8 and 14 recite similar limitations of claim 2. Therefore they are rejected based on the same reason accordingly.
Note claims 9 and 15 recite the corresponding limitations of claim 3. Therefore they are rejected based on the same reason accordingly.
Note claims 10 and 16 recite the corresponding limitations of claim 4. Therefore they are rejected based on the same reason accordingly.
Note claims 11 and 17 recite the corresponding limitations of claim 5. Therefore they are rejected based on the same reason accordingly.
Note claims 12 and 18 recite the corresponding limitations of claim 6. Therefore they are rejected based on the same reason accordingly.
Note claim 13 recites similar limitations of claims 1 and 7. Therefore it is rejected based on the same reason accordingly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 1/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
At the outset, Applicants are reminded that claims subject to examination will be given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In fact, the "examiner has the duty of police claim language by giving it the broadest reasonable interpretation." Springs Window Fashions LP v. Novo Industries, L.P., 65 USPQ2d 1862, 1830, (Fed. Cir. 2003). Applicants are also reminded that claimed subject matter not the specification, is the measure of the invention. Disclosure contained in the specification cannot be read into the claims for the purpose of avoiding the prior art. In re Sporck, 55 CCPA 743, 386 F.2d, 155 USPQ 687 (1986).
With this in mind, the discussion will focus on how the terms and relationships thereof in the claims are met by the references. Response to any limitations that are not in the claims or any arguments that are irrelevant and/or do not relate to any specific claim language will not be warranted.
Applicant argued that “Menachem’705 does not teach detect the reception of a packet indicating that the remote RDMA NIC has depleted out-of-order tracking resources and, in response to that detection, stop transmitting new packets to the network interface.” (Pages 14 and 15 of Applicant’s Amendment)
Examiner does not agree with Applicant. As set forth in the art rejection, Menachem’705 discloses the RDMA packet processing logic is configured to detect the reception of a packet indicating that the remote RDMA NIC has depleted out-of-order tracking resources (acknowledgment engine will recognize the occurrence of an OOS event, see para. [0031] and Fig. 2) and, in response to that detection, stop transmitting new packets to the network interface (retransmit the packet or packets indicated, without retransmitting the given packet and other later packets in the sequence, see paras. [0020], [0022], and [0025]; also note: delay transmission of packet, see para. [0031]). The claim detects receiving a packet “indicating…depleted…”. NAKs indicating which packet(s) have been dropped are an “indication” of depletion. In addition, nowhere in the claim is there suggestion of “sending a depleted out-of-order tracking resources packet”. The claim states “stop transmitting new packets”; however, the aspect of “new” is not clearly defined. Given the broadest reasonable interpretation, may be interpreted as stop/cancel/pause transmission of any packet possibly during a new cycle or broadly interpreted delaying transmission. The claimed “new packet” is not necessarily related to a “depleted out out-of-order tracking resources packet”. Applicant is suggested to further expand on “new” packets and “depleted”. Sufficiency and depletion are relative terminology because the claims fail to provide an objective standard for determining the degree or threshold associated with such terms, thereby rendering the scope uncertain.
Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In summary, Menachem’705 teaches the claimed limitations as set forth.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TITUS WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1627. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10am-6pm.
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, Idriss Alrobaye can be reached on (571) 270-1023. 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.
/TITUS WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2181
Prosecution Insights