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
Examiner acknowledges Applicant's amendment filed on June 3, 2026. Claims 1, 12, 19 and 20 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 9, 17 and 18 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 5,10-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCall et al. (US 2022/0123849 A1) in view of Pietilainen (US 2015/0222413 A1).
2. Regarding claim 1, McCall teaches a method for processing precision time protocol (PTP) messages in a logical time domain at a network element, the method comprising:
receiving an incoming PTP message at a logical PTP interface, which corresponds to one or more PTP ports of the network element, wherein the incoming PTP message includes a first domain number (Paragraphs [0043] and [0121] gPTP domain interface; logical port; domain number field indicates gPTP domain number); and for a PTP region, which is defined by its PTP domain and which corresponds to the logical PTP interface (Paragraphs [0043] and [0121] gPTP domain interface; logical port; domain number field indicates gPTP domain number; specified in section 8.1 in IEEE 802.1AS).
McCall does not explicitly disclose translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations.
Pietilainen teaches translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0051] compares domain number of received message with domain number of the synchronization domain; different domain numbers then domain number of messages are overwritten).
It would have obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations as taught by Pietilainen in the system of McCall for synchronization of computer network see abstract of Pietilainen.
3. Regarding claim 12, McCall teaches a network element, comprising:
a logical precision time protocol (PTP) interface, which corresponds to one or more PTP
ports of the network element (Paragraphs [0043] and [0121] gPTP domain interface; logical port; domain number field indicates gPTP domain number); and a PTP engine configured to:
wherein the configuration allows domain number for a PTP region, which is defined by its PTP domain and which corresponds to the logical PTP interface (Paragraphs [0043] and [0121] gPTP domain interface; logical port; domain number field indicates gPTP domain number; specified in section 8.1 in IEEE 802.1AS).
McCall does not explicitly disclose translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations.
Pietilainen teaches translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0051] compares domain number of received message with domain number of the synchronization domain; different domain numbers then domain number of messages are overwritten).
It would have obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations as taught by Pietilainen in the system of McCall for synchronization of computer network see abstract of Pietilainen.
4. Regarding claim 2, McCall in view of Pietilainen teaches wherein a PTP instance translates one or more PTP messages between a plurality of PTP regions corresponding to a plurality of network elements (McCall, Fig. 10 and 11 Paragraph [0115] to [0121] PTP message, domains).
5. Regarding claims 3 and 13, McCall in view of Pietilainen teaches wherein the configuration includes domain number translations for one or more logical PTP interfaces that are defined for a predetermined duration (McCall, Fig. 10 and 11 Paragraph [0115] to [0121] PTP message, domain numbers; path delay response message).
6. Regarding claims 5 and 14, McCall in view of Pietilainen teaches, further comprising:
automatically accepting a plurality of PTP messages based on a domain number field of
the plurality of PTP messages being a member of the active domain numbers database, which includes a default domain of the network element (McCall, Paragraph [0121] messages received for which the value is not one of the values specified is ignored).
7. Regarding claim 10, McCall in view of Pietilainen teaches further comprising:
automatically dropping a plurality of PTP messages based on a domain number field of
the plurality of the PTP messages not being a member of the active domain numbers database (McCall, Paragraph [0121] messages received for which the value is not one of the values specified is ignored).
8. Regarding claim 11, McCall in view of Pietilainen teaches further comprising:
adding one or more translations to the active domain numbers database based, at least
in part, on receiving a particular PTP message and associating a source port identity with a particular domain number from the particular PTP message such that outgoing PTP messages destined for the source port identity are automatically associated with the particular domain number (McCall, Paragraphs [0043] and [0121] gPTP domain interface; logical port; domain number field indicates gPTP domain number; specified in section 8.1 in IEEE 802.1AS; Pietilainen Paragraph [0051]).
9. Regarding claim 19, McCall in teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium (Paragraph [0195] machine readable medium) for processing precision time protocol (PTP)messages in a logical time domain, the computer-readable medium containing instructions executable by a processor for:
receiving an incoming PTP message at a logical PTP interface, which corresponds to one or more PTP ports of the network element, wherein the incoming PTP message includes a first domain number (Paragraphs [0043] and [0121] gPTP domain interface; logical port; domain number field indicates gPTP domain number); and
wherein the configuration allows domain number for a PTP region, which is defined by its PTP domain and which corresponds to the logical PTP interface (Paragraphs [0043] and [0121] gPTP domain interface; logical port; domain number field indicates gPTP domain number; specified in section 8.1 in IEEE 802.1AS).
McCall does not explicitly disclose translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations.
Pietilainen teaches translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0051] compares domain number of received message with domain number of the synchronization domain; different domain numbers then domain number of messages are overwritten).
It would have obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide translating the first domain number of the incoming PTP message into a second domain number that is different from the first domain number, the second domain number to be included in a field of an outgoing PTP message wherein the translating includes identifying an active domain number entry in an active domain numbers database that includes the second domain number and that is part of a configuration, and wherein the configuration allows domain number translations as taught by Pietilainen in the system of McCall for synchronization of computer network see abstract of Pietilainen.
Claims 4 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCall et al. (US 2022/0123849 A1) in view of Pietilainen (US 2015/0222413 A1) in view of Sachs et al. (US 2020/0259896 A1).
10. Regarding claims 4 and 20, McCall in view ot Pietilainen does not explicitly disclose further comprising:
maintaining the active domain numbers database that includes a configured set of active domains; and accepting a plurality of incoming PTP messages if they are members of at least one of the configured set of active domains as indicated by their respective domain number field.
Sachs teaches maintaining the active domain numbers database that includes a configured set of active domains; and accepting a plurality of incoming PTP messages if they are members of at least one of the configured set of active domains as indicated by their respective domain number field (Paragraphs [2343], [2344], [2351] and [2383] list of domain numbers; gPTP port; checking domain Number).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide maintaining the active domain numbers database that includes a configured set of active domains; and accepting a plurality of incoming PTP messages if they are members of at least one of the configured set of active domains as indicated by their respective domain number field as taught by Sachs in the system of McCall in view of Pietilainen for the UE to know which broadcasted signal belongs to which time domain see Paragraph [2341] of Sachs.
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCall et al. (US 2022/0123849 A1) in view of Pietilainen (US 2015/0222413 A1) in view of Yang et al. (US 2016/0173216 A1).
11. Regarding claims 7 and 15, McCall in view of Pietilainen does not explicitly disclose wherein the logical PTP interface corresponds to one or more PTP ports, which are virtually grouped as a multi-chassis link aggregation (MLAG) interface representing physical ports on at least two separate physical switches.
Yang teaches wherein the logical PTP interface corresponds to one or more PTP ports, which are virtually grouped as a multi-chassis link aggregation (MLAG) interface representing physical ports on at least two separate physical switches (Fig. 2 Paragraph [0041] multi-chassis link aggregation group).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the logical PTP interface corresponds to one or more PTP ports, which are virtually grouped as a multi-chassis link aggregation (MLAG) interface representing physical ports on at least two separate physical switches as taught by Yang in the system of McCall in view of Pietilainen for two-way timestamp exchange see abstract of Yang.
Claims 8 and 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCall et al. (US 2022/0123849 A1) in view of Pietilainen (US 2015/0222413 A1) in view of Umasuthan et al. (US 2023/0065686 A1).
12. Regarding claims 8 and 16, McCall in view of Pietilainen does not explicitly disclose, wherein the logical PTP interface corresponds to one or more PTP ports, which are virtual local area network (VLAN) aware ports described by a physical port and a PTP VLAN on which particular PTP messages are received.
Umasuthan teaches wherein the logical PTP interface corresponds to one or more PTP ports, which are virtual local area network (VLAN) aware ports described by a physical port and a PTP VLAN on which particular PTP messages are received (Paragraph [0023] PTP port groups belong to the same VLAN).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the logical PTP interface corresponds to one or more PTP ports, which are virtual local area network (VLAN) aware ports described by a physical port and a PTP VLAN on which particular PTP messages are received as taught by Umasuthan in the system of McCall in view of Pietilainen for configuring multiple ports of a network device see abstract of Umasuthan.
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 DIANE LEE LO whose telephone number is (571)270-1952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at (571)272-7969. 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.
/DIANE L LO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights