DETAILED ACTION
This Communication is a First Action on the Merits (FAOM). Claims 1-20, as originally filed, are pending and have been considered as follows.
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 .
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sinha et al (2022/0078090 A1).
As per Claim 1, Sinha teaches a method for transmitting data packets at a secondary network device, wherein the secondary network device is being managed by first device, the secondary network device (Figures 9 and 10 – References 510 and 520; Page 9, Paragraphs [0089] – [0091]; Page 15, Paragraphs [0136] – [0138]).
(Note: In paragraph [0136], Sinha describes the performing of deep tracing which allows information technology [IT] professionals [i.e. server device] to detect, troubleshoot and correct employee issues associated with their workstation [i.e. client device]. In paragraphs [0137] and, Sinha describes receiving a service call from a user client device. In response, the admin professional requests a deep tracing session be implemented on the user device via the cloud-based system [i.e. secondary network device being managed by a first device])
Sinha also teaches establishing a first connection and a second connection with a primary network device (Figures 9 and 10 – References 500, 530 and 540; Page 9, Paragraphs [0089] – [0091] and [0094]); establishing a management tunnel through the first connection (Figures 9 and 10 – References 500, 530 and 540; Page 9, Paragraphs [0089] – [0091] and [0094]); establishing at least one tunnel through the second connection (Figures 9 and 10 – References 500, 530 and 540; Page 9, Paragraphs [0089] – [0091] and [0094]).
(Note: In paragraph [0089], Sinha describes two communication channels – a control channel [i.e. management tunnel – first connection] and a data channel [i.e. second connection] that enable communication between a client device and a server device [i.e. primary network device]. Sinha indicates that the two communication channels form a cloud tunnel and further indicates that multiple data channels may be associated with the same control channel)
Sinha further teaches transmitting data packets via WAN interface of the second connection through a first data tunnel according to a policy (Figure 1 – Reference 104; Figure 4 – Reference 206; Page 3, Paragraphs [0048], [0049] and [0051]; Page 4, Paragraph [0053]; Page 5, Paragraphs [0063] and [0065]); wherein: the first connection is a connection established between a first management interface and a second management interface (Figure 3 – Reference 206; Figure 4 – Reference 306; Figure 9; Page 5, Paragraph [0065]; Page 6, Paragraph [0070]; Page 9, Paragraphs [0089] – [0093]).
(Note: In paragraphs [0048], [0051] and [0053], Sinha describes enterprises having their own policies and rules that are execute in accordance with a central authority. In paragraph [0063], Sinha describes a exemplary server network interface. In paragraph [0049], Sinha describes cloud service being implemented through the Internet [i.e. WAN]. The network interface allowing communication via the Internet is a WAN interface)
Sinha additionally teaches the second connection is a connection established between a first transmission interface and a second transmission interface; the first data tunnel is established between a first data tunnel interface and a second data tunnel interface; and the first data tunnel is a data tunnel of the at least one data tunnel, and corresponding to the WAN interface as described above.
(Note: As shown in Figures 9 and 10, there are two communication channels – a control channel [i.e. management tunnel] and a data channel [i.e. data tunnel] between a client device and a server device. Each of the server and the client has a network interface and as communication occurs via the Internet, the interface is a WAN interface)
As per Claims 2 and 12, Sinha teaches sending a first request to the primary device (Service Call: Page 15, Paragraph [0137]); and receiving a first reply for replying to the first request (Figure 37 – Reference 1151; Page 15, Paragraph [0147]).
As per Claims 3 and 13, Sinha teaches wherein the primary network device may require authentication from a third device before replying to the first request with the first reply (Identity Provider: Figure 1 – Reference 122; Page 3, Paragraph [0051]; Page 9, Paragraph [0093]).
As per Claims 5 and 15, Sinha teaches wherein the first connection and the second connection are established between a first network interface of the primary network device and a second network interface of the secondary network device as described in Claim 1. Sinha also teaches wherein the policy may be based on one or more of the following: type of network interface, service provider, bandwidth, throughput, latency, cost, location, type of data packet, application, user, user group, user preference, source address, and destination address (Page 2, Paragraph [0044]).
As per Claim 11, Sinha teaches a method as described in Claim 1. Sinha also teaches a second network device (Figure 1 – References 110, 116 and 118; Figures 4 and 5 – Reference 300; Page 3, Paragraph [0047]; Page 6, Paragraph [0068]), comprising: at least one processing unit (Figure 5 – Reference 302; Page 6, Paragraph [0069]); a plurality of network interfaces (Figure 5 – Reference 306; Page 6, Paragraph [0070]); and at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing program instruction executable by at least one processing unit (Page 16, Paragraphs [0150] and [0151]).
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) 4, 8-10, 14 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinha et al (2022/0078090 A1) in view of Chambers et al (2014/0068705 A1).
As per Claims 4 and 14, Sinha teaches the method and device of Claims 1 and 11; but does not teach wherein the at least one secondary network device is locked and only allows the modification made by the primary network device. However, Chambers teaches wherein the at least one secondary network device is locked and only allows the modification made by the primary network device (Access Control Policy/Rules: Page 2, Paragraph [0023]).
(Note: In paragraph [0023], Chambers describes access control policies [ACPs] and access control rules [ACRs] that are configured by administrators which determine a set of rules that define what rights and access is permitted within an organization. In the troubleshooting scenario described by Sinha limiting the ability to modify/make changes to the client [i.e. secondary device] and reserving them for the troubleshooter [i.e. primary device] allows for quicker resolution of the issue as it removes the client as an additional root cause)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and device taught by Sinha with the method and device taught by Chambers to prevent well-intentioned clients from overriding administrative scripts, altering critical system files or making unauthorized configuration changes during the session promoting faster, more secure and error-free issue resolution.
As per Claims 8 and 18, the combination of Sinha and Chambers teaches wherein the secondary management interface and the secondary transmission interface are in a first subnet (Chambers: Page 4, Paragraph [0052]). (Note: In paragraph [0052], Chambers describes management servers as web or cloud servers; and indicates that network access devices [i.e. client devices] may be associated with a local area network [LAN]. Chambers indicates that a LAN may refer to as a sub-network or network segment [e.g. subnet] of a larger LAN. Having the secondary management interface and the secondary transmission interface in the same LAN reads on the claimed language)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and device taught by Sinha with the method and device taught by Chambers to prevent well-intentioned clients from overriding administrative scripts, altering critical system files or making unauthorized configuration changes during the session promoting faster, more secure and error-free issue resolution.
As per Claims 9, 10, 19 and 20, the combination of Sinha and Chambers teaches wherein the second data tunnel interface is in a second subnet; wherein the first subnet and the second subnet are different subnets. (Note: Having the secondary management interface and the secondary transmission interface in a first LAN while the second data tunnel interface is in a different subnet reads on the claimed language)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and device taught by Sinha with the method and device taught by Chambers to prevent well-intentioned clients from overriding administrative scripts, altering critical system files or making unauthorized configuration changes during the session promoting faster, more secure and error-free issue resolution.
Claim(s) 6, 7, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinha et al (2022/0078090 A1) in view of Wu (2015/0026768 A1).
As per Claim 6, Sinha teaches the method and device of Claims 1 and 11; but does not teach wherein the first management interface, the second management interface, the first transmission interface, and the second transmission interface is a virtual network interface. However, Wu teaches wherein the first management interface, the second management interface, the first transmission interface, and the second transmission interface is a virtual network interface (Figure 3 – References 322 and 323; Page 4, Paragraph [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and device taught by Sinha with the method and device taught by Wu to enable troubleshooting technicians to bypass faulty physical hardware, isolate compromised workstations and securely access systems without altering the end-user’s primary network configuration or disrupting their daily workflow.
As per Claims 7 and 17, the combination of Sinha and Wu teaches sending the change in network connection to the primary network device through the management tunnel. (Note: During remote troubleshooting a client device’s network connection often changes due to system fixes, diagnostic commands or network instability actively interrupting and resetting the active connection [i.e. diagnostic steps requiring resetting the Wi-Fi or Ethernet adapters which drops and reestablishes the connection])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and device taught by Sinha with the method and device taught by Wu to enable troubleshooting technicians to bypass faulty physical hardware, isolate compromised workstations and securely access systems without altering the end-user’s primary network configuration or disrupting their daily workflow.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. GOKHALE et al (2015/0067112 A1), HERRERO (2017/0208102 A1), HERRERO (2017/0019433 A1), Corliss et al (7,680,100 B1), NG et al (2017/0070428 A1), Bleidorn et al (2025/0150302 A1), Chambers et al (2014/0068030 A1), Bleidorn (2025/0133028 A1) and Ylimartimo (2014/0040435 A1). Each of these describes systems and methods of remotely controlling network devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHARYE POPE whose telephone number is (571)270-5587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM - 4PM.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
KHARYE POPE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2693
/KHARYE POPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights