DETAILED ACTION
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 office action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed, 06 July 2026, of application filed, with the above serial number, on 29 April 2024 in which claims 1, 3, 5, 12, 14, 16-17 have been amended, claims 2, 4, 15, 18, 21, 23 cancelled, and claims 24-29 have been added. Claims 1, 3, 5-14, 16-17, 24-29 are pending in the application.
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, 3, 5-14, 16-17, 24-29 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. It is indefinite how the data processing system with a management controller is connected to a dependent data processing system via a point-to-point communication link, and at the same time a single network module of the data processing system and not part of the management controller. In other words, the claim appears to recite both a p2p link and network module while claiming there is only a single network module. (For context, new claim 25 recites the p2p link being a Bluetooth connection). Thus, the claim recites that the system have two network modules, a p2p or Bluetooth module in management controller 152 and a network module 160 as in Fig. 1B. Such point-to-point link being a network as is well known but also as described in par. 135 with network interface device may include wireless transceiver may be a Bluetooth transceiver.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 3, 5-14, 16-17, 24, 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Ballard et al (hereinafter “Ballard”, 2017/0187633).
As per Claim 1, Ballard discloses a method comprising:
obtaining, by a management controller installed in a data processing system and from a remote cloud server via an out-of-band communication channel, a data request indicating that: the management controller is an intermediate destination, and a dependent data processing system operably connected to the management controller via a point-to-point communication link is a final destination (at least paragraph 38; incoming network traffic to host system 98, a network packet may include a destination address (e.g., an IP address) of a dummy NIC rather than the IP address for management traffic of management controller 112. Using NAT, the dummy IP address may be converted to an IP address of USB NIC 210 by reference to IP conversion table 122, and thus, such packet may be routed from network interface 118 to USB NIC 210 via USB NIC 208),
wherein the data processing system comprises:
a first processor physically installed within a chassis or a housing of the data processing system (at least Fig. 1; 103);
the management controller, the management controller comprising a second processor that is physically installed within the chassis or the housing of the data processing system and that is different than the first processor (at least Fig. 1; 2nd processor 113; management controller 112); and
a single network module that is the only network module of the data processing system, wherein the single network module is not part of components that make up the management controller (at least Fig. 1; eg. 108), wherein the dependent data processing system is physically disposed external to the chassis or the housing of the data processing system, the dependent data processing system comprising a third processor that is different than the first processor and the second processor (at least Fig. 2; system 98),
and wherein the remote cloud server is physically disposed external to the chassis or the housing of the data processing system (at least paragraph 21; network interface 108 connected to other information handling systems), and
wherein the dependent data processing system is dependent on the management controller of the data processing system for communicating with the remote cloud server (at least Fig. 2; par. 35; host system 98 physically separate from management controller 112, connected via USB and having independent operating system 106; host system 98 is a physically (physical device 1) separate device from management controller 112 (physical device 2; see par. 17: management controller is a coupled to processor 103 and physically separate), that are physically installed in housing of information handling system 102 (physical device 3; see par. 17: 102 is a personal computer) and communicating with an externally-coupled data network (physical device 4) connected via USB and having independent operating system 106; physical device host system 98 is connected externally via USB to physical device management controller 112. Fig. 2 clearly shows host system 98 is dependent on management controller 112 being intermediate in order for communication on network interface 118);
based on the management controller not being the final destination for the data request, identifying, by the management controller, the point-to-point communication link based on the dependent data processing system being the final destination (at least paragraph 38; incoming network traffic to host system 98, a network packet may include a destination address (e.g., an IP address) of a dummy NIC rather than the IP address for management traffic of management controller 112. Using NAT, the dummy IP address may be converted to an IP address of USB NIC 210 by reference to IP conversion table 122, and thus, such packet may be routed from network interface 118 to USB NIC 210 via USB NIC 208); and
forwarding, by the management controller and using the point-to-point communication link, the data request to the dependent data processing system to facilitate cooperative provisioning of a computer implemented service provided, at least in part, by the dependent data processing system (at least paragraph 38; incoming network traffic to host system 98, a network packet may include a destination address (e.g., an IP address) of a dummy NIC rather than the IP address for management traffic of management controller 112. Using NAT, the dummy IP address may be converted to an IP address of USB NIC 210 by reference to IP conversion table 122, and thus, such packet may be routed from network interface 118 to USB NIC 210 via USB NIC 208),
wherein the single network module separately advertises different network endpoints for the first processor and the management controller such that both the out-of-band communication channel that services the management controller and an in-band communication channel that services the first processor run through the single network module (at least paragraph 32, 21; in band network communication vs out of band communication; Fig. 1: management network 118 going to controller 112 vs data network via 108 going to hardware; par. 38-39: using NAT for addressing and MAC VLAN to route endpoint IP addresses; Fig. 1, 2, par. 23, 27, 31; Management controller 112 may include a processor 113, memory 114, and a management network interface 118 separate from and physically isolated from data network interface 108 (hardware resources may be processor 113); network interface 108 in-band and 118 out-of-band connected via bridge module; a single bridge module 116 that is bridging communication between the management controller and network 118 and the host; a Level 2 bridge in a Level 2 layer/data link layer of the Internet Protocol suite or another networking suite) between network interface 118 and USB network interface module 120; MAC VLAN 124 and IP conversion table 122 that have eg. dummy IP addresses that are usable by external entities to be routed to USB device(s) via NAT),
wherein the single network module comprises a traffic manager that manages the different network endpoints by routing first network communications directed to the management controller exclusively to the out-of-band communication channel and routing second network communications directed to the first processor exclusively to the in-band communication channel (at least paragraph 32, 21; in band network communication vs out of band communication; Fig. 1: management network 118 going to controller 112 vs data network via 108 going to hardware; par. 36-40: using NAT for addressing and MAC VLAN to route endpoint IP addresses; management controller managing traffic and restricting traffic; host system 98 traffic and management controller 112 management traffic be routed to and from the same physical external network).
As per Claim 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the management controller and the single network module are on separate power domains from the first processor so that the management controller and the single network module are operable while the first processor is inoperable (at least paragraph 23; management may be made by management controller 112 even if information handling system 102 is powered off or powered to a standby state; DRAC).
As per Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the single network module hosts a transmission control protocol/internet protocol (TCP/IP) stack to facilitate network communications via the out-of-band communication channel (at least paragraph 20, 38).
As per Claim 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the data request is obtained from a remote cloud server, the remote cloud server and the data processing system being operably connected to each other via a network, and the remote cloud server is not operably connected to the dependent data processing system by any wide area or telecommunications-based networks (at least paragraph 38; incoming network traffic to host system 98; Fig. 2).
As per Claim 7. The method of claim 6, wherein the intermediate destination is a bridge for communications between the remote cloud server and the dependent data processing system (at least paragraph 38; bridge module).
As per Claim 8. The method of claim 1, wherein identifying the point-to-point communication link comprises: obtaining, by the management controller, a payload from the data request; identifying, by the management controller, a header in the payload; using, by the management controller, presence of an identifier of the final destination in the payload; and based on the identifier, identifying the point-to-point communication link (at least paragraph 37-38).
As per Claim 9. The method of claim 8, wherein the point-to-point communication link is identified by using the identifier as a key for a lookup, the lookup being performed using a lookup data structure that associates different final destinations with different point-to-point communication links, and the different point-to-point communication links operably connecting the management controller to dependent data processing systems (at least paragraph 37-38; eg. IP conversion table).
As per Claim 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the point-to-point communication link is a direct communication link that allows transmission of information between the management controller and the dependent data processing system without using any wide area or telecommunications-based networks (at least Fig. 2).
As per Claim 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the data request comprises a payload, and a header identifying a first portion of the payload being additional control information indicating the final destination and a second portion of the payload being the requested data (at least paragraph 37-38; network packet).
As per Claim 12. The method of claim 11, wherein forwarding the data request comprises: extracting, by the management controller, the final destination from the payload to identify the point-to-point communication link associated with the final destination; removing, by the management controller, the header and the first portion of the payload to obtain a modified data request; and providing, by the management controller and via the out-of-band communication channel, the modified data request and the point-to-point communication link to the single network module of the data processing system (at least paragraph 37-38; IP conversion table with network packet routed from management controller to USB NIC using NAT).
As per Claim 13. The method of claim 1, further comprising: prior to obtaining the data request: obtaining, by the management controller and via the point-to-point communication link, an identity of the dependent data processing system; and providing, by the management controller and via the out-of-band communication channel, the identity of the dependent data processing system to a remote cloud server for the management controller to be, as a proxy for the dependent data processing system, a facilitator of future communications between the dependent data processing system and the remote cloud server while the dependent data processing system and the remote cloud server are not directly connected to one another via any wide area or telecommunications-based networks (at least paragraph 23-24, 35, 38; processor coupled to USB; BMC or DRAC allowing remote management).
Claims 14, 16-17, 28, 29 do not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claims 1, 3, 6 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons, supra.
As per Claim 24. The method of claim 12, wherein the obtaining of the modified data request comprises: generating a new payload with only the requested data from the second portion of the payload of the data request; and including an identifier of the remote cloud server in the modified data request (at least paragraph 37-39; IP conversion table with network packet routed from management controller to USB NIC using NAT; converted address packet communicated to network).
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) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballard in view of Passafiume et al (hereinafter “Passafiume”, WO2023/119214).
As per Claim 25. Ballard fails to disclose wherein the point-to-point communication link comprises a Bluetooth connection established between the management controller of the data processing system and the dependent data processing system. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Passafiume. Passafiume discloses, in an analogous art, a bluetooth user device 102 communicating a request to a recipient device 106 via an access apparatus 110 that packages the request from the Bluetooth protocol into a packet for the Internet protocol (at least Fig. 1-2; p. 4-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Passafiume’s access apparatus with Ballard as Bluetooth is a well known protocol for nodes on a personal area network, for example and having an access node to bridge communications for the Bluetooth node with direct communication to the Internet nodes allows a Bluetooth node to operate on low power, a Bluetooth advantage, while still communicating on a WAN as well as Passafiume’s described advantages on the bottom of p. 12 and p. 2.
Claim(s) 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballard in view of Kariman (hereinafter “Kariman”, 2015/0215414).
As per Claim 26. Ballard teaches the management controller operating even while the system is powered off (par. 23) but fails to explicitly disclose further comprising obtaining, by the management controller, a data package generated by the dependent data processing system, wherein data package is obtained via a first publish-subscribe system where management controller subscribes to updates from the dependent data processing system thereby causing a copy of the data package to be propagated to the management controller while the first processor of the data processing system is unpowered. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Kariman. Kariman discloses using lightweight publish/subscribe protocols with out-of-band communications (at least Kariman paragraph 7, 11, 23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Kariman’s publish/subscribe with Ballard as Kariman teaches with large number of devices, potentially large number of notifications, and plurality of subscribers, using end-to-end communication is inefficient, it being beneficial to use lightweight publish/subscribe protocols, optimized for large number of smaller messages, multiple recipients, depending on the criticality of a message.
As per Claim 27. The method of claim 26, further comprising providing, by the management controller, the data package to the remote cloud server via a second publish-subscribe system where remote cloud server subscribes to updates from the management controller thereby causing the copy of the data package to be propagated to the remote cloud server while the first processor of the data processing system is unpowered (at least Kariman paragraph 7, 11, 23; multiple applications that subscribe to notifications published by the dependent system of Ballard).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Ballard does not disclose the amended limitations of a single network module that is the only network module of the data processing system.
However, first, as outlined in the 112 Rejection, it is not clear how there is a single network module when two are claimed. Second, as Fig. 1B shows, the single network module 160 has multiple interfaces 164 and par. 70 of the specification specifies that the network module have a plurality of network interfaces and different types of communication components:
network module 160 may include any number of interfaces 164. Interfaces 164 may be implemented using any number and type of communication devices which may each provide wired and/or wireless communication functionality. For example, interfaces 164 may include a wide area network card, a WiFi card, a wireless local area network card, a wired local area network card, an optical communication card, a radio access network (RAN) card, a wide area network (WAN) card, and/or other types of communication components
Yet also the point-to-point link is not described as being included in the network module communication interface scope. Thus, the data processing system is claimed as having a single network module comprising a plurality of interfaces and in addition a point-to-point communication link.
This contrasts with the arguments suggesting there is one network module that is the only network module of the data processing system including the management controller.
The argument toward the bottom of p. 14 also has quoted language of the amended claims which are not recited in the amendment, as the quoted language comes from prior claim 2 which is amended out of amended claim 1 (the network module not part of components that make up hardware resources).
Ballard par. 23, 32 also notes that the management controller may include a network interface 118 that is separate but is not limited to such separate interface as it may be an integral part of a BMC. Either way, Ballard teaches a single network module having multiple interfaces as the instant application discloses. And par. 40 teaches ‘host system 98 traffic and management controller 112 management traffic be routed to and from the same physical external network’.
Regarding claim 12 as amended, Applicant argues that Ballard does not alter the packets in any manner. However, Ballard teaches in par. 38-39: “network packet may include a destination address (e.g., an IP address) of a dummy NIC rather than the IP address for management traffic of management controller 112. Using NAT, the dummy IP address may be converted to an IP address of USB NIC 210 by reference to IP conversion table 122, and thus, such packet may be routed from network interface 118 to USB NIC 210 via USB NIC 208.” The converted IP address is of the packet and thus Ballard does alter the packet.
Ballard also teaches in par. 35 that external devices be on external networks ‘bridge module 116 may implement a bridge between network interface 118 and USB network interface module 120 and thus may enable operating system 106 executing on host system 98 to communicate with an externally-coupled data network via management controller 112 without impacting management traffic of management controller 112. Thus, if network interface 108 is not suitable for coupling to an available network or is not otherwise used for data communication, bridge module 116 may enable a communications path for host system 98 to a network externally coupled via management controller 112’. Lastly, Ballard describes that the management controller and interface 118 may be separate and physically isolated from host interface 108 and part of a BMC or Dell Remote Access Controller (par. 23).
See also cited Chaudhri, disclosing a wearable device 100 connected and paired to phone host device 102 via Bluetooth wherein some notifications are sent from a WAN to the host and addressed to the wearable when connected, else notified to host phone, for example (at least paragraph 13, 110, 115, 217, 274).
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY TODD whose telephone number is (303)297-4763. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5 MST.
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/GREGORY TODD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights