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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/5/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Tripathi.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. Claim(s) 1-4, 10-13 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam (US Patent 7,522,627) in view of Theron (US Patent Pub. 2012/0033620) and in view of Tripathi (US Patent Pub 20180249335).
As per claims 1, 10 and 19: Lam discloses a system for a first network device comprising: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory, to:
receive, at the first network device, security capabilities of a second network device of a network, the network comprising the first network device and the second network device (Col 1, lines 65-67 to Col 2 lines 1-3; receiving network packets, receiving state information (security capabilities) from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets);
However, Lam does not specifically disclose responsive to receiving the security capabilities of the second network device, locally modify a routing table of the first network device to indicate at least one route that reflects the received security capabilities of the second network device; and transmit a data packet based on the modified routing table (See Theon, Paragraph 82; Such changes in topology may include, for example, changing communication capabilities between devices (one device moving out of range, a change in the physical layer for operation, etc.). When such an instance occurs, the network management 322 may update the routing tables and distribute the routing tables to all the devices).
Therefore, it 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, having the teachings of Lam and Theron in it’s entirety, to modify the technique of Lam for receiving state information (security capabilities) from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets by adopting Theron's teaching for changing communication capabilities between devices and when such an instance occurs, the network management may update the routing tables. The motivation would have been to improve peer to peer routing system.
However, Lam in view of Theron do not specifically disclose locally modify a routing table of the first network device to indicate at least one route that reflects the received security capabilities of the second network device (claim 15; determining whether a routing table of a receiving device is to be updated; and when the routing table of the receiving device is to be updated: generating a routing table update message including generation of local flow control information for routing table update messages, and transmitting the routing table update message to the receiving device).
Therefore, it 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, having the teachings of Lam, Theron and Tripathi in it’s entirety, to modify the technique of Lam for receiving state information (security capabilities) from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets by adopting Tripathi's teaching for generating a routing table update message including generation of local flow control information for routing table update messages. The motivation would have been to improve peer to peer routing system.
As per claims 2, 11 and 20: The system of claim 1, wherein the security capabilities of the second network device comprise at least one of:
interface-level encryption capabilities; encryption-technology specific capabilities; secure boot capabilities; cryptographic signature capabilities; software version information; or firmware version information (See Lam, claim 26, 28; receiving state information from external agents; selecting a high priority forwarding path from forwarding paths based on the state information, wherein selecting the high priority forwarding path includes applying a cryptographic signature).
As per claims 3 and 12: The system of claim 1, wherein the security capabilities of the second network device are received from the second network device (See Lam, Col 1, lines 65-67 to Col 2 lines 1-3; receiving network packets, receiving state information from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets).
As per claims 4 and 13: The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further to:
determine security capabilities of the first network device; and transmit the security capabilities of the first network device to the second network device (See Lam, Col 1, lines 65-67 to Col 2 lines 1-3; receiving network packets, receiving state information from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets).
4. Claim(s) 5-6 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam (US Patent 7,522,627) in view of Theron (US Patent Pub. 2012/0033620) and in view of Tripathi (US Patent Pub 20180249335) and Lumbatis (US Patent 11,388,577).
As per claims 5 and 14: The system of claim 1, receive, at the first network device, security capabilities of a second network device of a network, the network comprising the first network device and the second network device (Col 1, lines 65-67 to Col 2 lines 1-3; receiving network packets, receiving state information (security capabilities) from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets);
However, Lam in view of Theron and Tripathi do not specifically disclose wherein the security capabilities of the second network device are received from a network controller (see Lumbatis; claim 8; The network controller of claim 7, wherein the one or metrics of the wireless network comprise capabilities of the station).
Therefore, it 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, having the teachings of Lam, Theron, Tripathi and Lumbatis in it’s entirety, to modify the technique of Lam for receiving state information (security capabilities) from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets by adopting Lumbatis teaching for wherein the one or metrics of the wireless network comprise capabilities of the station. The motivation would have been to improve peer to peer routing system.
As per claims 6 and 15: The system of claim 5, wherein the one or more processors are further to:
determine security capabilities of the first network device; and transmit the security capabilities of the first network device to the network controller (see Lumbatis; claim 8; The network controller of claim 7, wherein the one or metrics of the wireless network comprise capabilities of the station).
5. Claim(s) 7-9 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam (US Patent 7,522,627) in view of Theron (US Patent Pub. 2012/0033620) and in view of Tripathi (US Patent Pub 20180249335) and Beshai (US Patent 6,768,718).
As per claims 7 and 16: The system of claim 1, receive, at the first network device, security capabilities of a second network device of a network, the network comprising the first network device and the second network device (Col 1, lines 65-67 to Col 2 lines 1-3; receiving network packets, receiving state information (security capabilities) from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets).
However, Lam, Theron and Tripathi do not specifically disclose wherein the one or more processors are further to: receive security metrics of the second network device; determine that the security metrics fail to satisfy a security metrics criterion; and modify the routing table of the first network device based on the security metrics (See Beshai; Col 12, lines 50-56; The traffic deviation metric is compared to a predetermined threshold (step 1506). If the traffic deviation metric does not exceed the threshold, the traffic processing is complete. However, if the traffic deviation metric exceeds the threshold, the set of adaptive routing tables is updated (step 1508)).
Therefore, it 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, having the teachings of Lam, Theron, Tripathi and Beshai in it’s entirety, to modify the technique of Lam for receiving state information (security capabilities) from a plurality of external agents, selecting a forwarding path from a plurality of forwarding paths based on the state information, and transmitting packets by adopting Beshai’s teaching for wherein the traffic deviation metric exceeds the threshold, the set of adaptive routing tables is updated. The motivation would have been to improve peer to peer routing system.
As per claims 8 and 17: The system of claim 7, wherein the security metrics are received from the second network device (See Beshai; Col 12, lines 50-56; The traffic deviation metric is compared to a predetermined threshold (step 1506). If the traffic deviation metric does not exceed the threshold, the traffic processing is complete. However, if the traffic deviation metric exceeds the threshold, the set of adaptive routing tables is updated (step 1508)).
As per claims 9 and 18: The system of claim 7, wherein the security metrics are received from a network controller (See Beshai; Col 4, lines 47-51; Each node controller 106 communicates with a network controller 104 through a control channel 122 (shown in dashed lines). Network controller 104 is available to communicate with nodes 102 through a connection 124 to a port on node 102E).
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D BROWN whose telephone number is (571)270-1472. The examiner can normally be reached 730-330pm.
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, Linglan Edwards can be reached at 5712705440. 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.
/ANTHONY D BROWN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2408