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 .
This office action is responsive to amendment filed 12/04/2025.
Response to Amendment
The Examiner has acknowledged the amended claims 1 – 20.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Li is strictly focused on switch port fanout configuration, but not bandwidth limiting for system-to-system rate control to avoid or reduce data traffic congestion.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s assertion because Li discloses the management software in the management node 130 sends a signal to agents of systems and switches such as the nodes 112, 114, 116, and 118 to start a provision/checking session. The management software may deploy any existing mechanism to discover and provision neighbor relationships between the ports for all nodes in the interconnected network. Well-known existing mechanisms include but are not limited to the Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) and the Link Layer Discovery Protocol (LLDP). Messages according to LLDP are characterized by the fact that the packet scope is limited to the link which exists between the switch port of the switch 110 and the agent of the connected network node. (see paragraph [0029]).
Li further discloses that FIG. 6 is a routine run by the agent 120 of the Ethernet switch 110 in FIG. 2 to record the maximum values of the nodes connected to the ports of the Ethernet switch 110. On receiving a provisioning signal from the management node 130 in FIG. 2, the agent 120 picks up the next port (600). The agent 120 retrieves the port speed from the selected port (602). The agent then compares the retrieved port speed to the last enumerated port speed (604). If the current speed is greater than the last enumerated port speed (606), the agent 120 updates the enumerated port speed with the current port speed (608). The agent 120 then determines whether a session stop signal has been received from the management node 130 (610). If the current speed is not greater than the enumerated speed (606), the agent 120 proceeds to determine whether a session stop signal has been received (610). If no session stop signal is received, the agent 120 proceeds to the next port (600). If a session stop signal is received, the agent 120 ends the routine. (see paragraph [0046).
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.
Claims 1 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LI et al (US 2019/0097878; hereinafter LI).
Regarding claim 1, LI teaches a processor-implemented method comprising:
sending, to a centralized service of an Ethernet storage area network (SAN) (paragraphs [0023], [0029]; LI discloses the management software may deploy any existing mechanism to discover and provision neighbor relationships between the ports for all nodes in the interconnected network. Well-known existing mechanisms include but are not limited to the Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) and the Link Layer Discovery Protocol (LLDP)), a request from a first system to obtain an operating port speed of a second system (paragraphs [0010], [0023], [0031];. [0042] LI discloses that when the agent 120 receives a request or demand to determine the operating port speed of the NIC of a system node), in which the centralized service maintains the operating port speed of the second system paragraphs [0006], [0023], [0031 - 0032], [0042]; LI discloses the management node 130 performs the following operation. Such a demand may occur in upper application scenarios such as a situation where one application wants to find certain system nodes with specific NIC speed requirements via the management software. The management software may use the routine below to derive the NIC speed of system node); and
receiving a response from the centralized service that comprises the operating
port speed of the second system (paragraphs [0035], [0037], [0042 - 0043]; LI discloses that the routine to provide the operating speed of the network interface cards in the system is useful when managing a large pool of systems such as that found in a data center.); and
using at least the operating port speed of the second system in determining a bandwidth limit for communicating data traffic from the first system to the second system (paragraphs [0042 - 0043]; LI discloses that with the knowledge of the operating speed of the NICs in a system, resource pool administrators may filter out systems/servers more suitable to the application load to be deployed on the node with respect to network link speed/bandwidth.).
Regarding claim 2, LI discloses the processor-implemented method of claim 1 wherein the first system is a nonvolatile- memory express (NVMe) storage subsystem and the second system is a host system (paragraphs [0047], [0049], [0053]; LI discloses that [0049] Storage device 712 can be a non-volatile memory to store data that are accessible by a computer. The storage device 712 can be magnetic cassettes, flash memory cards, solid state memory devices, digital versatile disks, cartridges, random access memories (RAMs) 708, read only memory (ROM) 706, and hybrids thereof.).
Regarding claim 3, LI discloses the processor-implemented method of claim 1 wherein the step of receiving a response from the centralized service that comprises the operating port speed of the second system comprises:
receiving a notification from the centralized service indicating that the centralized service has information for the first system (paragraphs [0052 – 0053]);
sending the request from the first system responsive to receiving the notification from the centralized service that indicates that the centralized service has information for the first system (paragraphs [0052 – 0053]); and
receiving the operating port speed of the second system from the centralized service in the response (paragraphs [0052 – 0053]).
Regarding claim 4, LI discloses the processor-implemented method of claim 3 wherein: the notification from the centralized service is an asynchronous event notification (paragraphs [0051 - 0052]);
the request from the first system is a get log page request (paragraphs[0051 - 0052]); and the response is a response to the get log page request (paragraphs [0051 - 0052]).
Regarding claim 5, LI discloses the processor-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the step of using at least the operating port speed of the second system in determining a bandwidth limit for communicating data traffic from the first system to the second system comprises:
using the operating port speed of the second system divided by a number of port connections of the second system to set a port speed of its port for that second system (paragraphs [0005]; LI discloses that one or more of the 40 Gbit/s ports 20 are fanned out to four 10 Gbit/s ports such as the ports 22a, 22b, 22c and 22d. In this example, some systems such as the system 14 have two 10 Gbit/s ports connecting to two ports 22b and 22d of one of the 40 Gbit/s ports in 4×10 Gbit/s fanout mode. Some systems such as the system 16 have a single 40 Gbit/s port connecting to the port 20 in a 1×40 Gbit/s fanout mode ).
Regarding claim 6, LI and SMITH disclose the processor-implemented method of claim 1 wherein centralized service obtains the operating port speed of the second system by performing steps comprising:
obtaining the operating port speed of the second system from a datastore accessible by the centralized service (paragraph [0043]), in which the operating port speed of the second system was obtained using at least one of the following methods:
obtaining the operating port speed of the second system from the second system as part of a registration process with the centralized service and storing the operating port speed of the second system in the datastore (paragraphs [0043], [0045]; LI discloses that the agent 120 keeps the fanout mode as the detected fanout mode and records the port configuration in memory (510) ); and
obtaining the operating port speed of the second system from a network information handling system that is or was connected to the second system (paragraphs [0042 – 0043]).
Regarding claim 7, LI discloses the processor-implemented method of claim 6 wherein the step of obtaining the operating port speed of the second system from the network information handling system that is or was connected to the second system comprises:
obtaining the operating port speed of the second system from the network information handling system in response to the request from the first system (paragraphs [0035], [0037], [0042 - 0043]).
Regarding claim 8, LI discloses the processor-implemented method of claim 6 wherein the step of obtaining the operating port speed of the second system from the network information handling system that is or was connected to the second system comprises:
obtaining the operating port speed of the second system from the network information handling system prior to the centralized service receiving the request from the first system (paragraphs [0040 – 0041]; LI discloses that the agent 120 picks up the switch ports of the Ethernet switch 110 one by one until the agent 120 receives a session/checking stop signal from the management software on the management node 130).
Claims 9 – 20 incorporate substantively all the limitations of claims 1 – 8 with minor modifications in the claimed language. The reasons for rejecting claims 1 – 8 apply in claims 9 – 20. Therefore, claims 9 – 20 are rejecting for the same reasons.
Thus, the Examiner contends that the prior art read on the claimed invention.
It appears that applicants are interpreting the claims very narrow without considering the broad teaching of the references used in the rejection. Applicants are reminded that the examiner is entitled to the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims. The Applicants always have the opportunity to amend the claims during prosecution and broad interpretation by the examiner reduces the possibility that the claim, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. In re Prater 162 USPQ 541,550-51 (CCPA 1969).
In view of such, the rejections are as follows:
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YVES DALENCOURT whose telephone number is (571)272-3998. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5:30PM.
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, Ario Etienne can be reached at 571-272-4001. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/YVES DALENCOURT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Prosecution Insights