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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/20/2025 has been entered.
Claim status in the amendment received on 10/20/2025:
Claims 2 have been amended.
Claim 1 has been cancelled.
Claims 2-71 are pending.
Examiner Note
With respect to claim 1, giving the claim the broadest reasonable interpretation, the steps of this method claim are not given a patentable weight because they are not required to be performed when the condition(s) precedent are not met “only when in the operation state”. Please see MPEP 2111.04, II. CONTINGENT LIMITATIONS.
Nevertheless, the claim limitations are fully addressed in the rejections below.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 2 is/are objected to because of the following informalities.
As to claim 2, the limitations “the URLs”, in the last two limitations, should be “the multiple URLs” for better consistency with the antecedent basis.
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 2-71 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.
As to claim 2,
The claim recites the limitation “the second client device”, at least in lines 19 and 21. However, there are multiple antecedent basis for the limitations in the claim.
The claim recites the limitations “the URL” and “the received URL”, in lines 46-47. However, there are insufficient antecedent basis for the limitations in the claim.
As to claim 22, the claim further recites the limitation “the device”. Here is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
As to claim 26, the following limitations lack a proper antecedent basis:
“the IP address”, in line 2.
“the identifier”, in line 11.
“the identifier of the first client device”, in lines 15-16.
“the stored first client device identifier”, in lines 17-18.
“the IP address of the device”, in lines 17-18.
As to claim 35, the following limitations lack a proper antecedent basis:
“the device status”, in line 3.
“the device”, in line 4.
“the identifier”, in line 10.
As to claim 68, the following limitations lack a proper antecedent basis:
“the first or second device”, in lines 2-3.
As to the claim(s) that are dependent on claim(s) 2, the dependent claim(s) are also rejected under 112(b) for the same reason of their base claim(s).
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.
Claim(s) 2-25, 51-67 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shribman et al. (Pub. No.: US 20200220746 A1).
As to claim 2, Shribman teaches a method for use with a web server that stores a content that is identified by a Uniform Resource Locator (URL), and for use with an Internet-connected managing server that comprises a database for Operations, Administration, registration, or Management (OA&M) functions associated with a first or second client device (paragraph [0542]), wherein the first or second client device is configured to be in distinct activation, operation, and non-operation states, the method by the first or second client device, only when in the operation state (paragraph [0610]), the method comprising:
receiving, by the first client device that is not a server device, from a first server over the Internet, a first request that includes the URL (fig. 12a, 131a, “72” teaches a first server and “71” teaches a first client, paragraphs [0533] and [0562], “the TB server 71 may executes a client side protocol, and the tunnel #4 33d may execute a server side protocol”);
extracting, by the first client device, the URL from the first request (paragraph [0562], “…the TB server 71 forwards the requested content identification to the selected tunnel…” and paragraph [0533]);
forming, by the first client device, a second request that includes the URL, or modifying the first request to obtain the second request (paragraph [0562], “…The message sent over the message path 131b…”);
sending, by the first client device to the second client device over the Internet, the second request (fig. 12b, 131b, “33d” teaches the second client device);
receiving, by the second client device from the first client device over the Internet, the second request (fig. 12b, 131b); and
sending, by the second client device to the web server over the Internet, the received second request (fig. 12b, 131c),
wherein the sending of the received second request to the web server uses an IP address of the second client device, so that an IP address of the first client device is unknown to the web server (paragraph [0549], “…It is noted that such tunneling provides anonymity and untraceability, where the web server 22b is only aware of the request from the selected tunnel device, and is ignorant to the identity of the origin of the request…”),
wherein, except for using the IP address of the second client device, the second client device transparently passes messages between the first client device and the web server (paragraph [0549], “…the tunnel device forwards the request for content, using tunneling or proxy scheme, to the web server 22b…” and “…For example, in case where the requesting client 31a is in a location A, and the selected tunnel device that is used is in a location B, the web server 22b may only be aware (such as by using IP geolocation) to the request arrival from the location B…”), and
wherein the first or second client device is housed in a single enclosure (fig. 12, 71 or 33d),
wherein the single enclosure comprises no more than a one Local Area Network (LAN) connector and a LAN transceiver or modem for communication over the LAN (paragraph [0182]),
wherein the primary or exclusive function of the first client device is to execute steps in the operation state, and wherein the method further comprising: receiving, over the Internet by the LAN connector from the first server, multiple URLs (paragraph [0551]);
for each of the multiple URLs, sending, over the Internet by the LAN connector to the respective web server that stores the respective web-page identified by the URL, the received URL (paragraph [0551]);
for each of the URLs, receiving, over the Internet by the LAN connector from the respective web server, the respective web-page (paragraph [0564]); and
for each of the URLs, sending, over the Internet by the LAN connector to the first server, the received respective web-page (paragraph [0564]).
Shribman does not explicitly teach using the IP address of the second client device as a source address.
However, Shribman further teaches, as shown above in paragraph [0549], the web server is only aware of the IP associated with request arrived from location of the second client device, “location B”, which indicates using IP address of the second client device as source IP address.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the IP address of the second client device as a source address when sending requests to the web server in order to enable the web server to send responses to the second client device utilizing the source IP address of the requester.
As to claim 3, Shribman teaches wherein the exclusive function of the first client device is to execute the steps (paragraph [0542]).
As to claim 4, Shribman teaches further comprising Operations, administration, registration, or management (OA&M) functions that are exclusively or primarily associated with executing the steps in the operation state, and wherein the OA&M functions comprise registration, operation, monitoring, maintenance, support, collecting performance data, collecting accounting data, or any combination thereof (paragraph [0542]).
As to claim 5, Shribman teaches wherein all of hardware elements in the single enclosure are primary or exclusively for executing the steps in the operation state, and wherein all software modules stored in the device are primary or exclusively for executing the steps in the operation state (paragraph [0542]).
As to claim 6, Shribman teaches wherein the first server and the managing server are distinct servers (paragraph [0527]).
As to claim 7, Shribman teaches wherein the first server and the managing server are the same server (paragraph [0527]).
As to claim 8, Shribman teaches wherein the first or second client device consists or, comprises, or is part of, a client device and is in a client/server architecture with the managing server (paragraph [0695]).
As to claim 9, Shribman teaches wherein the communication over the Internet with the managing server, is based on, uses, or is compatible with, Transmission Control Protocol over Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) protocol or connection (paragraph [0718]).
As to claim 10, Shribman teaches wherein the communication over the Internet with the managing server, is based on, uses, or is compatible with, HTTP protocol or connection, wherein the managing server serves as an HTTP server and the device serves as an HTTP client, and wherein the HTTP is based on, comprises, or consists of, HTTP/1.1, HTTPS, HTTP/2, HTTP/3, or any combination thereof (paragraph [0718]).
As to claim 11, Shribman teaches wherein the communication over the Internet with the managing server, is based on, uses, or is compatible with, Socket Secure (SOCKS) protocol or connection, wherein the managing server serves as a SOCKS server and the first client device serves as a SOCKS client (paragraph [0330]).
As to claim 12, Shribman teaches wherein the SOCKS protocol or connection is according to, based on, or is compatible with, SOCKS4, SOCKS4a, or SOCKS5 (paragraph [0330]).
As to claim 13, Shribman teaches wherein the SOCKS protocol or connection is according to, based on, or is compatible with, IETF RFC 1928, IETF RFC 1929, IETF RFC 1961, or IETF RFC 3089 (paragraph [0330]).
As to claim 14, Shribman teaches wherein the communication over the Internet with the managing server, is based on, uses, or is compatible with, HTTP Proxy protocol or connection, wherein the managing server serves as an HTTP Proxy server and the first client device serves as an HTTP Proxy client (paragraph [0330]).
As to claim 15, Shribman teaches further comprising establishing a connection with the managing server (paragraph [0399]).
As to claim 16, Shribman teaches wherein the established connection comprises, is based on, or consists of, a TCP connection using 'Active OPEN', 'Passive OPEN', or TCP keepalive mechanism (paragraph [0399]).
As to claim 17, Shribman teaches wherein the established connection uses, or is based on, Virtual Private Network (VPN) (paragraph [0399]).
As to claim 18, Shribman teaches wherein the LAN is according to, is compatible with, or is based on, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) IEEE 802.3-2008 standard (paragraph [0010]).
As to claim 19, wherein the LAN comprises, is based at least in part on, or consists of, a wired LAN that is according to, is compatible with, or is based on, 10Base-T, 100Base-T, 100Base-TX, 100Base-T2, 100Base-T4, 1000Base-T, 1000Base-TX, 10GBase-CX4, or 10GBase-T (paragraph [0010]).
As to claim 20, Shribman teaches wherein the LAN connector comprises a RJ-45 type connector (paragraph [0010]).
As to claim 21, Shribman teaches wherein the LAN comprises, is based on, or consists of, a fiber-optics medium LAN that is according to, is compatible with, or is based on, 10Base-FX, 100Base-SX, 100Base-BX, 100Base-LX10, 1000Base-CX, 1000Base-SX, 1000Base-LX, 1000Base-LX10, 1000Base- ZX, 1000Base-BX10, 10GBase-SR, 10GBase-LR, 10GBase-LRM, 10GBase-ER, 10GBase-ZR, or 10GBase-LX4, and wherein the LAN connector comprises a fiber-optic connector (paragraph [0010]).
As to claim 22, Shribman teaches wherein the first client device further stores an identifier for uniquely identifying the device in the LAN or over the Internet (paragraph [0186]).
As to claim 23, Shribman teaches wherein the identifier comprises a Media Access Control (MAC) address, an Internet Protocol (IP) address, or a hostname (paragraph [0186]).
As to claim 24, Shribman teaches wherein the identifier comprises a Media Access Control (MAC) address that is MAC-48, Extended Unique Identifier (EUI) EUI-48, or EUI-64 address type (paragraph [0186]).
As to claim 25, Shribman teaches wherein the identifier comprises an Internet Protocol (IP) address that is IPv4 or IPv6 type address (paragraph [0186]).
As to claim 51, Shribman teaches further comprising estimating or calculating, using a timing counter in the managing server, the total time in a pre-defined time interval in which the device is associated with 'available' status in the database (paragraph [0634]).
As to claim 52, Shribman teaches further comprising estimating or calculating, using a timing counter in the device, the total time in a pre-defined time interval in which the device is properly connected to the Internet or is in operation state (paragraph [0634]).
As to claim 53, Shribman teaches wherein the time interval is at least 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, or 10,000 hours or minutes, or wherein the time interval is less than 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, 10,000 or 20,000 hours or minutes (paragraph [0634]).
As to claim 54, Shribman teaches wherein the time interval is at least1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, or 10,000 weeks or months, or wherein the time interval is less than 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, 10,000 or 20,000 weeks or months (paragraph [0634]).
As to claim 55, Shribman teaches further for use with a user that operates a user computer, the method further comprising notifying the user, responsive to an end of the pre-defined time interval, by sending a timing message to the user computer that is based on, or in response to, the estimated or calculated total time (paragraph [0553]).
As to claim 56, Shribman teaches wherein the notifying comprises sending over the Internet via a wireless network to the user computer using a peer-to-peer scheme (paragraph [0301]).
As to claim 57, Shribman teaches wherein the notifying comprises sending over the Internet to an Instant Messaging (IM) server for being sent to the user computer as part of an IM service (paragraph [0144]).
As to claim 58, Shribman teaches wherein the communication with the IM server uses, is compatible with, or is based on, a protocol selected from the group consisting of SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol), SIP (Session Initiation Protocol), SIMPLE (SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions), APEX (Application Exchange), Prim (Presence and Instance Messaging Protocol), XMPP (Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol), IMPS (Instant Messaging and Presence Service), RTMP (Real Time Messaging Protocol), STM(Simple TCP/IP Messaging) protocol, Azureus Extended Messaging Protocol, Apple Push Notification Service (APNs), and Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) (paragraph [0144]).
As to claim 59, Shribman teaches wherein the timing message comprises, is based on, or consists of, text- based message and the IM service comprises, is based on, or consists of, text messaging service (paragraph [0144]).
As to claim 60, Shribman teaches wherein the timing message is according to, or based on, message selected from the group consisting of a Short Message Service (SMS) message and the IM service comprises, is based on, or consists of, SMS service, an electronic-mail (e-mail) message and the IM service comprises, is based on, or consists of, an e-mail service, a WhatsApp message and the IM service comprises, is based on, or consists of, WhatsApp service, a Twitter message and the IM service comprises, is based on, or consists of, Twitter service, and a Viber message and the IM service comprises, is based on, or consists of, Viber service (paragraph [0144]).
As to claim 61, Shribman teaches wherein the timing message comprises, is based on, or consists of, Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) or an Enhanced Messaging Service (EMS) message that includes audio or video, and the IM service is respectively an NMS or EMS service (paragraph [0144]).
As to claim 62, Shribman teaches further comprising estimating or counting, the total amount of data in a pre-defined time interval transferred between the first server and multiple web servers, received from the multiple web servers, sent to the first server, or any combination thereof (paragraph [0336]).
As to claim 63, Shribman teaches wherein the estimating or counting is performed by the first server (paragraph [0336]).
As to claim 64, Shribman teaches wherein the estimating or counting is performed by the first client device (paragraph [0336]).
As to claim 65, Shribman teaches further comprising sending the estimated or counted total amount of data to the managing server to be added to the database therein (paragraph [0343]).
As to claim 66, Shribman teaches wherein the time interval is at least 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, or 10,000 hours or minutes, or wherein the time interval is less than 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, 10,000 or 20,000 hours or minutes (paragraph [0670]).
As to claim 67, Shribman teaches wherein the time interval is at least1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, or 10,000 weeks or months, or wherein the time interval is less than 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, 10,000 or 20,000 weeks or months (paragraph [0670]).
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.
Claim(s) 68-71 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shribman et al. (Pub. No.: US 20200220746 A1) in view of Neel (Patent No.: US 11457022 B1).
As to claim 68, Shribman does not explicitly teach adding a domain name to a list.
However, in the same field of endeavor (computer networks) Neel teaches for use with a list of domain names stored in a memory in the first or second device, the method further comprising adding respective domain names of the received URLs to the list in response to the receiving of the URLs, or the method further comprising adding respective domain names of the received web-pages to the list in response to the receiving of the web-pages (col. 6, lines 48-66).
Based on Shribman in view of Neel, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate adding a domain name to a list (taught by Neel) with using the IP address of the second client device as a source address when sending requests to the web server with the proxy service (as taught by Shribman) in order to enable the web server to send responses to the second client device utilizing the source IP address of the requester, and in order to analyze the list of domain names to identify problematic domains.
As to claim 69, Neel further teaches wherein the list includes at least 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, or 10,000 last domain names, or wherein the list includes less than 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 5,000, or 10,000 last domain names (col. 6, lines 48-66). The limitations of claim 69 are rejected in view of the analysis of claim 68 above, and the rationale to combine, as discussed in claim 68, applies here as well.
As to claim 70, Neel further teaches wherein the list includes the domain names in a pre-defined time interval (col. 5, lines 49-55). The limitations of claim 70 are rejected in view of the analysis of claim 68 above, and the rationale to combine, as discussed in claim 68, applies here as well.
As to claim 71, Neel further teaches further comprising sending, by the first or second device to the managing server, the stored list to be stored in the database (col. 3, lines 14-30). The limitations of claim 71 are rejected in view of the analysis of claim 68 above, and the rationale to combine, as discussed in claim 68, applies here as well.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDULKADER M ALRIYASHI whose telephone number is (313)446-6551. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8AM - 5PM Alt, Friday, EST.
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, JOON HWANG can be reached at (571)272-4036. 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.
/Abdulkader M Alriyashi/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447 12/21/2025