CTNF 18/668,726 CTNF 80070 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 1. This is in response to communication filed on 5/20/24 in which claims 1-20 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 2. 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. 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA 3. Claim s 1-2, 4-5, , 7-12, 14-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2020/0021532 to Borikar et al . a. As per claim 1, Borikar et al teaches a method, comprising: determining, using connection scheduling logic and based on a flow index selected using the connection scheduling logic of a transmitter, a flow label for a packet, wherein the flow label indicates a given flow of a plurality of flows within a single connection between the transmitter and a receiver (See paragraph [0058]); updating, by the receiver, congestion control metadata for a received packet, wherein the congestion control metadata is used to determine a rate at which packets can be sent on each flow of the plurality of flows (See paragraph [0054, 0062, 0065], receives the congestion message and slows down the rate at which it transmits data into the network from the container that is the participating in the flow ); generating, by the receiver, an acknowledgement based on the flow label associated with the received packet, wherein the acknowledgement comprises the updated congestion control metadata (See paragraph [0056]); and transmitting, by the receiver, the acknowledgement to the transmitter (See paragraph [0056]). b. As per claim 10, Borikar et al teaches a system for transmitting packets via a plurality of flows within a connection, the system comprising: the connection between a transmitter and a receiver, the connection comprising the plurality of flows for the packets to traverse between the transmitter and the receiver (See paragraph [0058]); the transmitter configured to transmit a packet and a flow label associated with the packet to the receiver; the receiver configured to: receive the packet via a given flow(See paragraph [0058]); update congestion control metadata, wherein the congestion control metadata is used to determine a rate at which packets can be sent on each flow of the plurality of flows (See paragraph [0054, 0062, 0065], receives the congestion message and slows down the rate at which it transmits data into the network from the container that is the participating in the flow ); and generate an acknowledgement based on the flow label associated with the packet, wherein the acknowledgement comprises the updated congestion control metadata (See paragraph [0056]); and transmit the acknowledgement to the transmitter (See paragraph [0056]). c. As per claim 2, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein the connection scheduling logic is a weighted round robin (See paragraph [0022]). d. As per claims 4 and 15, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches further comprising storing, by the receiver, the flow index in a transmitter context of the packet (See paragraph [0046 and 0058]). e. As per claim 5, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein when updating the congestion control metadata, the method further comprises: identifying, based on the flow label of the received packet, the flow index associated with the congestion control metadata (See paragraph [0041 and 0043]); and updating the congestion control metadata at the flow index (See paragraph [0022 and 0038]). f. As per claim 7, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein the flow label is associated with a weight corresponding to a level of congestion for the flow (See paragraph [0015]). g. As per claims 8 and 14, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein the flow label corresponds to the flow index (See paragraph [0012], The network adapter device compares the packet metadata with information in a flow table to identify an entry in the flow table corresponding to a flow to which the packet metadata matches ). h. As per claim 15, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches further comprising storing, by the receiver, the flow index in a transmitter context of the packet (See paragraph [0046 and 0058]). i. AS per claim 16, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein updating the congestion control metadata comprises: determining, based on the flow label of the received packet, the flow index (See paragraph [0041 and 0043]); and updating the congestion control metadata at the flow index (See paragraph [0058]). j. As per claims 9 and 17, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein the congestion control metadata includes at least one of timestamps, CSIG data, hop count, or cumulative ECN count (See paragraph [0052-0053]). k. As per claim 11, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein the transmitter is configured to determine the flow label using connection scheduling logic comprising: selecting a flow index for the packet (See paragraph [0041 and 0043]); and identifying, based on the selected flow index, the flow label for the packet (See [0012], The network adapter device compares the packet metadata with information in a flow table to identify an entry in the flow table corresponding to a flow to which the packet metadata matches ). l. As per claim 12, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein the transmitter is configured to select a flow index and identify the flow label using a weighted round robin scheduler (See paragraph [0022]). m. As per claim 19, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Borikar et al teaches wherein the flow label is associated with a weight corresponding to a level of congestion for the flow (See paragraph [0022]). n. As per claim 20, Borikar et al teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media storing instructions that when executed by a network device comprising one or more processors (See paragraph [0044]), cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: selecting, using connection scheduling logic of a transmitter, a flow index for a packet (See paragraph [0044-0045]); determining, using connection scheduling logic and based on a flow index selected using the connection scheduling logic of a transmitter, a flow label for the packet, wherein the flow label indicates a given flow of a plurality of flows within a single connection between the transmitter and a receiver (See paragraph [; updating, by the receiver, congestion control metadata, wherein the congestion control metadata is used to determine a rate at which packets can be sent on each data path of the plurality of data paths (See paragraph [0054, 0062, 0065], receives the congestion message and slows down the rate at which it transmits data into the network from the container that is the participating in the flow ) ; generating, by the receiver, an acknowledgement based on the flow label associated with the received packet, wherein the acknowledgement comprises the updated congestion control metadata (See paragraph [0056]); and transmitting, by the receiver, the acknowledgement to the transmitter (See paragraph [0056]) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 4. 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA 5. Claim s 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2020/0021532 to Borikar et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0045967 to Hu et al . a. As per claim 6, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. However, Borikar et al fails to teach further comprising determining, based on the flow label associated with the packet, a weight for each flow label and a congestion window for a given flow of the plurality of flows. Hu et al teaches determining, based on the flow label associated with the packet, a weight for each flow label and a congestion window for a given flow of the plurality of flows (See paragraph [0085, 0127-128, reallocating congestion window values between flow in S ). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of Hu et al in the claimed invention of Borikar et al in order to remotely allocating bandwidth among content consumers on a computing network may include creating a profile for each flow of a plurality of flows of content from a content provider to a content consumer on the computing network. b. As per claim 18, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. However, Borikar et al fails to teach further comprising one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: determine, based on the flow label associated with the packet, a weight for each flow label and a congestion window for the connection in a given data path of the plurality of flows. Hu et al teaches comprising one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: determine, based on the flow label associated with the packet, a weight for each flow label and a congestion window for the connection in a given data path of the plurality of flows (See paragraph [0085, 0127-128, reallocating congestion window values between flow in S ). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of Hu et al in the claimed invention of Borikar et al in order to remotely allocating bandwidth among content consumers on a computing network may include creating a profile for each flow of a plurality of flows of content from a content provider to a content consumer on the computing network . 07-21-aia AIA 6. Claim s 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2020/0021532 to Borikar et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 2024/0333655 to Cheng et al . a. As per claims 3 and 13, Borikar et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. However, Borikar et al fails to teach wherein the weighted round robin is configured to: maintain a number of available credits for each flow index; advance to a next flow index for each subsequent packets; and reload the number of available credits when the number of available credits reaches zero. Cheng et al teaches wherein the weighted round robin is configured to: maintain a number of available credits for each flow index (See paragraph [0036]); advance to a next flow index for each subsequent packet (See paragraph [0036]); and reload the number of available credits when the number of available credits reaches zero (See paragraph [0036 and 0041]). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of Cheng et al in the claimed invention of Borikar et al in order to schedule packet transmissions on a routing component (See paragraph [0001]) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA 7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Publication No. 2020/0236051 to Hu et al teaches Congestion Flow Identification Method and Network Device. U.S. Publication No. 2017/0264555 to Yonezu teaches Frame Forwarding Device and Method for Requesting Setting of Processing for Flow. 8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DJENANE BAYARD whose telephone number is (571)272-3878. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571)272-3964. 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. /DJENANE M BAYARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 2 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 3 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 4 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 5 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 6 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 7 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 8 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 9 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 10 Art Unit: 2444 Application/Control Number: 18/668,726 Page 11 Art Unit: 2444
Prosecution Insights