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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 10/8/2024 and 5/28/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 5: line 4 includes “followed by” which should be similar to - of - to obviate potential indefinite issues where “followed by” appears to indicate a temporal limitation.
Regarding claim 18: lines 8-9 includes “with the address of the node device added” which should be similar to - with the added address of the node device - to obviate interpretation where the “added” limitation is related to “node device” as opposed to “address”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,052,782 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because take an example of comparing claim 1 of the pending application and claims 1, 2, and 4 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,052,782 B2.
Pending Application No. 18/767,546
U.S. Patent No. US 12,052,782 B2
Claim 1 A method comprising:
Claim 1 A method comprising: receiving, by a first node in a mesh network, a first unicast message that includes a multicast join request from a member node included in a multicast group of nodes included in the mesh network, wherein the multicast join request specifies a first shortest path from the member node to a multicast group leader also included in the multicast group; forwarding, by the first node, the first unicast message to the multicast group leader along the first shortest path;
forwarding, by the first node, a second unicast message from the multicast group leader to the member node along a second shortest path, wherein the second unicast message includes a multicast join acknowledgment; and in response to forwarding the second unicast message, declaring, by the first node to the multicast group leader, the first node as a multicast forwarder in the multicast group for a predefined duration.
receiving, by a first node in a mesh network, a multicast advertisement message broadcast by a multicast group leader to advertise a multicast group; and forwarding, by the first node, the updated multicast advertisement message to a neighbor of the first node.
Claim 2 The method of claim 1, further comprising, prior to receiving the first unicast message, forwarding, by the first node, a first multicast advertisement message from the multicast group leader to one or more direct neighbors of the first node based on a maximum hop limit.
adding, by the first node, an address of the first node to the multicast advertisement message to create an updated multicast advertisement message;
Claim 4 The method of claim 2, wherein forwarding the first multicast advertisement message from the multicast group leader comprises adding, by the first node, an address associated with the first node to an address vector included in the first multicast advertisement message.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 includes in lines 2-3 “a second multicast group” and continues with limitations associated with the “second multicast group”, however, in looking to the disclosure, a “second multicast group” is not found, much less limitations associated with a “second multicast group”. The closest descriptions found are in para. [07, 35] which discuss nodes in the same multicast group reside in different networks, not that two multicast groups exist, much less the specific claim limitation (receiving a second advertisement message advertising a second multicast group; receiving a third advertisement message advertising the second multicast group; and in response to determining that a first routing metric for a second ordered list of node device addresses in the second advertisement message is lower than a second routing metric for a third ordered list of node device addresses in the third advertisement message: updating the second advertisement message by adding the address of the node device to the second ordered list of node device addresses; forwarding the updated second advertisement message; and dropping the third advertisement message). Accordingly, the above subject matter is not considered to describe in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2008/0170550 A1) hereinafter Liu550 in view of Liu et al. (US 7,184,421 B1) hereinafter Liu421.
Regarding claim 1, Liu550 teaches a method comprising: receiving, by a first node in a mesh network, a multicast advertisement message broadcast by a multicast group leader to advertise a multicast group ([first] node receives broadcasted Route Announcement (RANN) [advertisement message] from group leader for multicast group; para. 59).
While Liu550 discloses routing protocols, updating messages, and forwarding / broadcasting messages, Liu550 does not explicitly disclose adding, by the first node, an address of the first node to the multicast advertisement message to create an updated multicast advertisement message; and forwarding, by the first node, the updated multicast advertisement message to a neighbor of the first node.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 teaches adding, by the first node, an address of the first node to the multicast advertisement message to create an updated multicast advertisement message (each receiving node adds own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting; Col. 6 lines 40-62); and forwarding, by the first node, the updated multicast advertisement message to a neighbor of the first node (retransmitting updated received message to nodes in local vicinity; Col. 6 lines 40-62).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the system of Liu550, where Liu550’s routing protocol for path establishment and discovery (para. 06) along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 1..
Liu550 does not explicitly disclose wherein adding the address of the first node to the multicast advertisement message comprises adding the address of the first node to an address vector of the updated multicast advertisement message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches wherein adding the address of the first node to the multicast advertisement message comprises adding the address of the first node to an address vector of the updated multicast advertisement message (messages include node identifier [address] of each node through which message has passed [vector], each forwarding node adds its own identifier prior to retransmitting); Col. 6 lines 33-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 1.
Liu550 further teaches adding, by the first node, a path cost included in the multicast advertisement message to a link cost between the first node and a second node from which the multicast advertisement message was received to create an updated path cost (node that receives RANN updates metric field [path cost]; para. 39); and including, by the first node, the updated path cost in the updated multicast advertisement message (node broadcasts updated RANN message; para. 39).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 1.
Liu550 further teaches wherein forwarding the updated multicast advertisement message comprises broadcasting the updated multicast advertisement message (node broadcasts updated RANN message; para. 39).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 1.
Liu550 further teaches receiving, by the first node from the neighbor of the first node, a multicast join request from a second node (node broadcasts route request (RREQ) message including join flag to all nodes to join multicast group; para. 49), the multicast join request including a first path that is a reverse of a second path followed by the updated multicast advertisement message (source node [group leader] that sent RANN establishes reverse route from destination to source; para. 40, group leader response to RREQ; para. 51); and forwarding, by the first node, the multicast join request according the first path (group leader response to RREQ; para. 51).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 5.
Liu550 does not explicitly disclose wherein the second path is determined from addresses added by nodes in the mesh network that forwarded the multicast advertisement message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches wherein the second path is determined from addresses added by nodes in the mesh network that forwarded the multicast advertisement message (each receiving node adds own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting; Col. 6 lines 40-62, join traffic on reverse path; [Col. 8 line 7, Col. 10 lines 28-30]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 5.
Liu550 further teaches receiving, by the first node, a multicast join acknowledgement (node broadcasts RREQ message including join flag to all [first] nodes to join multicast group; para. 49, group leader responds to RREQ with RREP; para. 51, reverse path of RREQ used for RREP [implying first node receives acknowledgement]; para. 32), the multicast join acknowledgement including a third path that is a reverse of the first path (reverse path of RREQ used for RREP; para. 32); and forwarding, by the first node, the multicast join acknowledgement to the neighbor node according to the third path (node broadcasts RREQ message including join flag to all [first] nodes to join multicast group; para. 49, group leader responds to RREQ with RREP; para. 51, reverse path of RREQ used for RREP [implying first node forwarding]; para. 32).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 8.
Liu550 does not explicitly disclose in response to forwarding the multicast join acknowledgement, declaring, by the first node to the multicast group leader, the first node as a multicast forwarder for the multicast group.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches in response to forwarding the multicast join acknowledgement (use of acknowledgement between nodes when retransmitting; Col. 28 line 54 - Col 29 line 25), declaring, by the first node to the multicast group leader, the first node as a multicast forwarder for the multicast group (when acknowledgement received, message successfully forwarded [declared as forwarder]; Col. 28 line 54 - Col 29 line 25).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 1.
While Liu550 discloses time-to-live (TTL, at least suggesting max hop limit and decrementing), Liu550 does not explicitly disclose decrementing, by the first node, a maximum hop limit in the multicast advertisement message to create an updated maximum hop limit; and including, by the first node, the updated maximum hop limit in the updated multicast advertisement message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches decrementing, by the first node, a maximum hop limit in the multicast advertisement message to create an updated maximum hop limit (message includes hop count, node update hop count; Col. 25 lines 30-33 [where in view of Liu550’s TTL, maximum hop count can be determined through either incrementing or decrementing]); and including, by the first node, the updated maximum hop limit in the updated multicast advertisement message (node forwards message with updated hop count; Col. 25 lines 30-39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1, including one or more non-transitory computer readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a first networking device in a mesh network (performed with hardware, software, memory, and processor; para. 61-62: Liu550), appending (each receiving node adds own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting for path information [appending]; Col. 6 lines 40-62: Liu550); and broadcasting (retransmitting / flood [broadcast] updated received message to nodes in local vicinity; Col. 6 lines 40-62: Liu550).
Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 11.
Liu550 further teaches receiving a second message, the second message including a request from a third networking device to join the multicast group, and forwarding the second message (node broadcasts route request (RREQ) message including join flag to all nodes to join multicast group; para. 49, source node [group leader] that sent RANN establishes reverse route from destination to source; para. 40, group leader response to RREQ; para. 51).
While Liu550 discloses reverse direction, forwarding, and group leader, Liu550 does not explicitly disclose according to a source routing header of the second message, the source routing header identifying a second network route that is a reverse of a third network route from the leader networking device to the third networking device that includes the updated network route.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches according to a source routing header of the second message, the source routing header identifying a second network route that is a reverse of a third network route from the leader networking device to the third networking device that includes the updated network route (each receiving node adds own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting; Col. 6 lines 40-62, join traffic on reverse path; [Col. 8 line 7, Col. 10 lines 28-30]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 13.
Liu550 further teaches receiving a third message that includes an acknowledgement from the leader networking device of the second message (node broadcasts RREQ [second] message including join flag to all [first] nodes to join multicast group; para. 49, group leader responds to RREQ with RREP [third] message; para. 51, reverse path of RREQ used for RREP [implying first node receives acknowledgement]; para. 32); and forwarding the third message according to a fourth network route included the third message, the fourth network route being a same network route as the third network route (node broadcasts RREQ message including join flag to all [first] nodes to join multicast group; para. 49, group leader responds to RREQ with RREP; para. 51, reverse path of RREQ used for RREP [implying first node forwarding]; para. 32).
Liu550 does not explicitly disclose source routing header.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches source routing header (on-demand multicast for establishing routes not limited to specific protocol; Col. 31 lines 2-6, on-demand techniques include dynamic source routing (DSR) that includes entire route in message; Col. 1 lines 37-46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 11.
Liu550 further teaches receiving a second message advertising the multicast group (node periodically broadcasts RANN; para. 38); and in response to determining that (1) a first sequence counter included in the first message is the same as a second sequence counter included in the second message and (2) a first routing metric included in the first message is lower than a second routing metric included in the second message (forwarding only when node determines second RANN message has same or greater sequence number [determining to be the same] and better metric [determining to be lower] than previous / first RANN; para. 39), not forwarding an updated version of the second message (otherwise discard RANN message; para. 39).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 11.
Liu550 further teaches receiving a second message advertising the multicast group (node periodically broadcasts RANN; para. 38); and in response to determining that a maximum hop count included in the second message is zero, not forwarding an updated version of the second message (RANN message includes time-to-live (TTL); para. 46 at least suggesting dropping message once TTL has expired [zero]).
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 11, including ordered list of node device addresses (each receiving node adds own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting for path information [ordered list]; Col. 6 lines 40-62: Liu421).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 17.
Liu550 further teaches extracting a first path cost associated with the ordered list on node addresses from the first advertisement message (RANN message includes metric field, TTL, route lifetime [associated with list]; para. 38, node that receives RANN updates [extracts] metric field [path cost]; para. 39); adding a routing cost of a link between the second node device and the node device to the first path cost to generate a second path cost (node that receives RANN updates metric field [path cost]; para. 39); and including the second path cost in the updated first advertisement message (broadcasts / retransmits / floods RANN with updated metric; para. 39).
Liu550 does not explicitly disclose the second path cost being a path cost associated with a path identified by the ordered list of node device addresses with the address of the node device added.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches the second path cost being a path cost associated with a path (join traffic on reverse path; [Col. 8 line 7, Col. 10 lines 28-30], path costs in hops; [Col. 16 lines 30-32, Col. 25 lines 10-11]) identified by the ordered list of node device addresses with the address of the node device added (on-demand multicast for establishing routes not limited to specific protocol; Col. 31 lines 2-6, on-demand techniques include dynamic source routing (DSR) that includes entire route in message; Col. 1 lines 37-46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 17.
Liu550 further teaches receiving a second message, the second message including a request to join the multicast group by a third node device ([third] node broadcasts route request (RREQ) message including join flag to all nodes to join multicast group; para. 49); and forwarding the second message to a fourth node device (group leader response to RREQ; para. 51).
While Liu550 discloses reverse direction and forwarding, Liu550 does not explicitly disclose identified by a next address in a second ordered list of node device addresses included in the second message, the second ordered list of node device addresses including a reverse of the ordered list of node device addresses included in the first advertisement message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches identified by a next address in a second ordered list of node device addresses included in the second message (on-demand multicast for establishing routes not limited to specific protocol; Col. 31 lines 2-6, on-demand techniques include dynamic source routing (DSR) that includes entire route in message; Col. 1 lines 37-46), the second ordered list of node device addresses including a reverse of the ordered list of node device addresses included in the first advertisement message (each receiving node adds [ordered] own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting; Col. 6 lines 40-62, join traffic on reverse path; [Col. 8 line 7, Col. 10 lines 28-30]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 17.
Liu550 further teaches receiving a second advertisement message advertising a second multicast group (node is a member of two groups; para. 53, node receives broadcasted RANN [advertisement message] from group leader for multicast group; para. 59); receiving a third advertisement message advertising the second multicast group (node periodically broadcasts RANN; para. 38); and in response to determining that a first routing metric in the second advertisement message is lower than a second routing metric for the third advertisement message (forwarding when node determines second RANN message has same or greater sequence number and better metric [determining to be lower] than previous / first RANN; para. 39); and dropping the third advertisement message (otherwise discard RANN message; para. 39).
Liu550 does not explicitly disclose for a second ordered list of node device addresses, a third ordered list of node device addresses, updating the second advertisement message by adding the address of the node device to the second ordered list of node device addresses; forwarding the updated second advertisement message; and dropping the third advertisement message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu421 further teaches for a second ordered list of node device addresses (each receiving node adds own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting for path information [ordered list]; Col. 6 lines 40-62), a third ordered list of node device addresses (each receiving node adds own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting for path information [ordered list]; Col. 6 lines 40-62), updating the second advertisement message by adding the address of the node device to the second ordered list of node device addresses (each receiving node adds own node identifier [address] to message prior to retransmitting; Col. 6 lines 40-62); forwarding the updated second advertisement message (retransmitting / forwarding / broadcasting updated received message to nodes in local vicinity; Col. 6 lines 40-62).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu421 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu421’s routing maintenance and creation (Col. 2 line 59 - Col. 3 line 24) improves the system by reducing overhead related to routing.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu550 in view of Liu421 and further in view of Liu et al. (US 2009/0303902 A1) hereinafter Liu902.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 teaches the limitation of claim 5.
While the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 discloses determining link costs and lower / less costly route, the combination of Liu550 and Liu421 does not explicitly disclose wherein the second path is a path having a lowest path cost from the multicast group leader to the second node.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu902 teaches wherein the second path is a path having a lowest path cost from the multicast group leader to the second node (protocol builds source-specific shortest path; para. 07).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention at the time the invention was made
to provide the technique of Liu902 to the modified system of Liu550 and Liu421, where Liu550 and Liu421’s modified system along with Liu902’s efficient route establishment (para. 05) improves the system by enabling shortest paths between nodes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cain (US 2003/0202465 A1) discloses hierarchical mobile ad-hoc network and methods for performing reactive routing therein using dynamic source routing (DSR).
Kim et al. (US 2012/0155269 A1) discloses a lightweight multicast method and apparatus for data distribution service.
Vasseur et al. (US 2013/0223275 A1) discloses on-demand diverse path computation for limited visibility computer networks.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE L PEREZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7348. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 am - 3 pm.
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/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/JOSE L PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights