DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 have been examined and are rejected.
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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 and 14-15 would be allowable if a terminal disclaimer is filed to overcome the nonstatutory double patenting rejection and the claims are rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12074785. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims cover substantially the same subject matter and recite similar limitations. Specifically, the claims of the instant application are anticipated by the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12074785. .
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 16, claims 1, 10 and 16 of U.S. Application No. 18773511 correspond to claims 1, 10 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12074785. See the table below.
U.S. Application No. 18773511
U.S. Patent No. 12074785
Claim 1. A method for sending data over a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices, the method comprising: selecting a first logical link path and a second logical link path between a first endpoint and a second endpoint of the communications network,
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an International Organization for Standardization (OSI) layer 5 logical link path from the first endpoint to the second endpoint including a respective intermediate network device of the plurality of network devices, and wherein the respective intermediate network device for the first logical link path is different than the respective intermediate network device for the second logical link path, and
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links between the first endpoint and the second endpoint; establishing a communications session between the first endpoint and second endpoint using the first logical link path; and based on a metric indicative of health of the first logical link path, continuing the communications session using the second logical link path.
Claim 1. A method for sending data over a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices, the method comprising: selecting a first logical link path and a second logical link path between a first endpoint and a second endpoint of the communications network,
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an International Organization for Standardization (OSI) layer 5 logical link path from the first endpoint to the second endpoint including a respective intermediate network device of the plurality of network devices, and wherein the respective intermediate network device for the first logical link path is different than the respective intermediate network device for the second logical link path, and
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links between the first endpoint and the second endpoint; establishing a communications session between the first endpoint and second endpoint; communicating data packets for the communications session using the first logical link path; determining that a performance of the second logical link path is better than a performance of the first logical link path; and in response to determining the performance of the second logical link path is better than a performance of the first logical link path, communicating additional data packets for the communications session on the second logical link path.
Claim 10. A computing device comprising: a processing system; and a memory storing computer-executable instructions thereupon which, when executed by the processing system, cause the computing device to perform operations comprising: causing a first logical link path and a second logical link path to be established with a remote endpoint in a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices, the first and second logical link paths each comprising an OSI layer 5 link path including intermediate network devices, wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link paths have at least a different intermediate network device, and wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links with the remote endpoint;
establishing a communications session with the remote endpoint using the first logical link path; and based on a metric indicative of health of the first logical link path, continuing the communications session using the second logical link path.
Claim 10. A computing device comprising: a processing system; and a memory storing computer-executable instructions thereupon which, when executed by the processing system, cause the computing device to perform operations comprising: causing a first logical link path and a second logical link path to be established with a remote endpoint in a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices, the first and second logical link paths each comprising an OSI layer 5 link path including intermediate network devices, wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link paths have at least a different intermediate network device, and wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links with the remote endpoint;
establishing a communications session with the remote endpoint; communicating data packets for the communications session using the first logical link path; determining a metric indicative of a time of receipt of packets on the first logical link path; based on the metric, determining presence of a network condition at the communications network that is indicative of a performance degradation of the first logical link path; and in response to determining the presence of the network condition indicative of the performance degradation, communicating data packets for the communications session on the second logical link path.
Claim 16. A system comprising: a processing system; and a memory storing computer-executable instructions thereupon which, when executed by the processing system, cause the system to perform operations comprising: determining a first logical link path and a second logical link path between a first endpoint and a second endpoint over a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices,
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an OSI layer 5 link path, and wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link paths have at least a different intermediate network device, and wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links between the first endpoint and the second endpoint;
establishing a communications session between the first endpoint and second endpoint using the first logical link path; and based on a metric indicative of health of the first logical link path, continuing the communications session using the second logical link path.
Claim 16. A system comprising: a processing system; and a memory storing computer-executable instructions thereupon which, when executed by the processing system, cause the system to perform operations comprising: determining a first logical link path and a second logical link path between a first endpoint and a second endpoint over a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices,
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an OSI layer 5 link path, and wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link paths have at least a different intermediate network device, and wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links between the first endpoint and the second endpoint;
establishing a communications session between the first endpoint and second endpoint; communicating data packets for the communications session using the first logical link path; determining a metric indicative of a time of receipt of packets on the first logical link path; based on the metric, determining presence of a network condition at the communications network that is indicative of a performance degradation of the first logical link path; and in response to determining the presence of the network condition indicative of the performance degradation, communicating data packets for the communications session on the second logical link path.
Regarding claims 2-9, 11-15 and 17-20, claims 2-9, 11-15 and 17-20 of U.S. Application No. 18773511 correspond respectively to claims 2-9, 11-15 and 17-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12074785.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 9-12, 16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11477117) in view of Verzun et al. (U.S. PGPub 2018/0359811).
Regarding claim 1, Ramamurthy teaches A method for sending data over a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices, the method comprising: selecting a first logical link path and a second logical link path between a first endpoint and a second endpoint of the communications network, (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5; see col. 9, lines 1-8 where two or more nodes 220 may be linked, connected, and/or configured to form the HA cluster 210. For example, the nodes 220 may form a logical or virtual node (which may be referred to as a chassis cluster) that is more resilient; see col. 12, line 50-col. 13, line 5 monitoring session traffic communicated via a first route path between a first endpoint and a second endpoint...)
including a respective intermediate network device of the plurality of network devices, and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) (intermediate network device) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device Rl and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 3, lines 30-43 where the endpoint device R1 may be associated with a session service provider (e.g., for an application, a streaming media service, and/or the like). As shown in FIG. 1A, the endpoint device may be connected to a session platform of the session service provider. The session platform may provide session traffic (e.g., application traffic, streaming media traffic, and/or the like) to the endpoint device R1...)
wherein the respective intermediate network device for the first logical link path is different than the respective intermediate network device for the second logical link path, and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) (intermediate network device of Path A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device Rl and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 8, lines 1-4 where the node B and/or other nodes (intermediate network device of path B) of the HA cluster B may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 via the path B.)
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links between the first endpoint and the second endpoint; (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A (and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B); thus, both path A and path B are active...)
establishing a communications session between the first endpoint and second endpoint using the first logical link path; and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...; see col. 5, lines 6-20 establish a session between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2.)
based on a metric indicative of health of the first logical link path, continuing the communications session using the second logical link path. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...)
However, Ramamurthy does not explicitly teach wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an International Organization for Standardization (OSI) layer 5 logical link path from the first endpoint to the second endpoint
Verzun teaches wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an International Organization for Standardization (OSI) layer 5 logical link path from the first endpoint to the second endpoint (Verzun, see figs. 11-15 intermediate nodes (POTS, SDNP gateways, Ethernet/network routers); see paragraph 0413-0414 where the session between the caller's cell phone and VPN host is established, the caller's cell phone must then instruct the VPN host to create a VPN tunnel from the caller's cell phone to the VPN host. This leg of the VPN tunnel is facilitated as a Layer 5 session with the tunnel encrypted by Layer 6...establish an application Layer 5 session between calling and destination cell phones; see paragraph 0411 where Layer 5 is used to create a virtual VP session 723; see paragraph 0718 the intermediate devices in Last Mile routing; see paragraph 0603 multipath transport, i.e. transmitting the data packets over multiple and different paths (first and second paths))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Ramamurthy and Verzun to provide the technique of an International Organization for Standardization (OSI) layer 5 logical link path from the first endpoint to the second endpoint of Verzun in the system of Ramamurthy in order to provide communication tasks such as SNMP 1431A, Internet-standard protocol for collecting and organizing information connected devices on IP networks (Verzun, see paragraphs 0884).
Regarding claim 2, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches further comprising: determining a metric indicative of packet latency for the first logical link path; and based on the metric, determining presence of a network condition at the communications network that is indicative of a performance degradation of the first logical link path. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 21-48 where the node A may measure one or more traffic metrics associated with the path A. A traffic metric associated with the path A may include, for example, a latency metric associated with the path A, a bandwidth metric associated with the path A, a jitter metric associated with the path A, and/or the like...determine a measurement of a latency metric and/or a measurement of a jitter metric...)
Regarding claim 4, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches wherein the metric is a first metric, further comprising: determining a second metric indicative of a time of receipt of packets on the second logical link path; and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 21-48 where the 40 node A may determine a measurement of a latency metric and/or a measurement of a jitter metric associated with the path A by comparing a time of transmission of one or more probe messages and a time of receipt of one or more corresponding response messages...)
determining that the second logical link path is healthy based on the second metric. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 6, line 62 determine that the particular traffic metric is enhanced on the path B relative to the path A (e.g., that the path B may provide a better performance with respect to the particular traffic metric than the path A). For example, when the particular traffic metric is a latency metric, the node A may determine that the latency metric is less on the path B relative to the path A.)
Regarding claim 5, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches wherein data packets used for determining the metric are data packets being communicated for the communications session. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; col. 9, lines 43-58 ...provide session traffic to other endpoint devices 240 via network 230 (e.g., by routing packets using an HA cluster 210 and/or a node 220 as intermediaries...)
Regarding claim 9, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are prioritized based on a resource cost of sending data on a respective link and a latency of the respective link. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 21-48 where the node A may measure one or more traffic metrics associated with the path A. A traffic metric associated with the path A may include, for example, a latency metric associated with the path A, a bandwidth metric associated with the path A, a jitter metric associated with the path A, and/or the like...determine a measurement of a latency metric and/or a measurement of a jitter metric...; see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 6, line 62 determine that the particular traffic metric is enhanced on the path B relative to the path A (e.g., that the path B may provide a better performance with respect to the particular traffic metric than the path A). For example, when the particular traffic metric is a latency metric, the node A may determine that the latency metric is less on the path B relative to the path A.)
Regarding claim 10, Ramamurthy teaches A computing device comprising: a processing system; and a memory storing computer-executable instructions thereupon which, when executed by the processing system, cause the computing device to perform operations comprising: causing a first logical link path and a second logical link path to be established with a remote endpoint in a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices, (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...; see col. 5, lines 6-20 establish a session between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2.)
including intermediate network devices, wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link paths have at least a different intermediate network device, and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) (intermediate network device of Path A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device Rl and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 8, lines 1-4 where the node B and/or other nodes (intermediate network device of path B) of the HA cluster B may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device Rl and the endpoint device R2 via the path B.)
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links with the remote endpoint; (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A (and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B); thus, both path A and path B are active...)
establishing a communications session with the remote endpoint using the first logical link path; and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...; see col. 5, lines 6-20 establish a session between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2.)
based on a metric indicative of health of the first logical link path, continuing the communications session using the second logical link path. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...)
However, Ramamurthy does not explicitly teach the first and second logical link paths each comprising an OSI layer 5 link path
Verzun teaches the first and second logical link paths each comprising an OSI layer 5 link path (Verzun, see figs. 11-15 intermediate nodes (POTS, SDNP gateways, Ethernet/network routers); see paragraph 0413-0414 where the session between the caller's cell phone and VPN host is established, the caller's cell phone must then instruct the VPN host to create a VPN tunnel from the caller's cell phone to the VPN host. This leg of the VPN tunnel is facilitated as a Layer 5 session with the tunnel encrypted by Layer 6...establish an application Layer 5 session between calling and destination cell phones; see paragraph 0411 where Layer 5 is used to create a virtual VP session 723; see paragraph 0718 the intermediate devices in Last Mile routing; see paragraph 0603 multipath transport, i.e. transmitting the data packets over multiple and different paths (first and second paths))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Ramamurthy and Verzun to provide the technique of the first and second logical link paths each comprising an OSI layer 5 link path of Verzun in the system of Ramamurthy in order to provide communication tasks such as SNMP 1431A, Internet-standard protocol for collecting and organizing information connected devices on IP networks (Verzun, see paragraphs 0884).
Regarding claim 11, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are established using User Datagram Protocol (UDP). (Verzun, see paragraph 0122 where the packet's destination, including the transport protocol, e.g. UDP, TCP, etc. being used…; see paragraph 0397 where the IP packet is being sent to, how the data is being transported, i.e. UDP...) The motivation regarding to the obviousness to claim 10 is also applied to claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches wherein the metric is a first metric, further comprising: determining a second metric indicative of a time of receipt of packets on the second logical link path; and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 21-48 where the 40 node A may determine a measurement of a latency metric and/or a measurement of a jitter metric associated with the path A by comparing a time of transmission of one or more probe messages and a time of receipt of one or more corresponding response messages...)
determining that the second logical link path is healthy based on the second metric. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 6, line 62 determine that the particular traffic metric is enhanced on the path B relative to the path A (e.g., that the path B may provide a better performance with respect to the particular traffic metric than the path A). For example, when the particular traffic metric is a latency metric, the node A may determine that the latency metric is less on the path B relative to the path A.)
Regarding claim 16, Ramamurthy teaches A system comprising: a processing system; and a memory storing computer-executable instructions thereupon which, when executed by the processing system, cause the system to perform operations comprising: determining a first logical link path and a second logical link path between a first endpoint and a second endpoint over a communications network comprising a plurality of network devices, (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...; see col. 5, lines 6-20 establish a session between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2.)
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link paths have at least a different intermediate network device, and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) (intermediate network device of Path A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device Rl and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 8, lines 1-4 where the node B and/or other nodes (intermediate network device of path B) of the HA cluster B may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device Rl and the endpoint device R2 via the path B.)
wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are active links between the first endpoint and the second endpoint; (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A (and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B); thus, both path A and path B are active...)
establishing a communications session between the first endpoint and second endpoint using the first logical link path; and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...; see col. 5, lines 6-20 establish a session between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2.)
based on a metric indicative of health of the first logical link path, continuing the communications session using the second logical link path. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...)
However, Ramamurthy does not explicitly teach wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an OSI layer 5 link path, and
Verzun teaches wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an OSI layer 5 link path, and (Verzun, see figs. 11-15 intermediate nodes (POTS, SDNP gateways, Ethernet/network routers); see paragraph 0413-0414 where the session between the caller's cell phone and VPN host is established, the caller's cell phone must then instruct the VPN host to create a VPN tunnel from the caller's cell phone to the VPN host. This leg of the VPN tunnel is facilitated as a Layer 5 session with the tunnel encrypted by Layer 6...establish an application Layer 5 session between calling and destination cell phones; see paragraph 0411 where Layer 5 is used to create a virtual VP session 723; see paragraph 0718 the intermediate devices in Last Mile routing; see paragraph 0603 multipath transport, i.e. transmitting the data packets over multiple and different paths (first and second paths))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Ramamurthy and Verzun to provide the technique of wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path each comprise an OSI layer 5 link path of Verzun in the system of Ramamurthy in order provide communication tasks such as SNMP 1431A, Internet-standard protocol for collecting and organizing information connected devices on IP networks (Verzun, see paragraphs 0884).
Regarding claim 18, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches the memory storing computer-executable instructions thereupon which, when executed by the processing system, cause the system to perform operations comprising: based on the metric, determining that performance of the second logical link path has degraded; and (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 8, lines 21-41 where compare the measurements of one or more traffic metrics associated with the path B and the measurements of the one or more traffic metrics associated with the path A and may determine that a particular traffic metric is enhanced on the path A relative to the path B...cause the node A to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2...)
in response to determining that performance of the second logical link path has degraded, communicating data packets for the communications session on the first logical link path. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 8, lines 21-41 where compare the measurements of one or more traffic metrics associated with the path B and the measurements of the one or more traffic metrics associated with the path A and may determine that a particular traffic metric is enhanced on the path A relative to the path B...cause the node A to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2...)
Regarding claim 19, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches the memory storing computer-executable instructions thereupon which, when executed by the processing system, cause the system to perform operations comprising: maintaining the communications session while switching communication of data packets from the first logical link path to the second logical link path. (Ramamurthy, see figs. 1A-1E and 5-6; see col. 5, lines 5-20 where node A ( and/or other nodes of the HA cluster A) may receive and route the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via 112, the node A may compare measurements of one or more the path A); see col. 7, lines 4-33 where determining that the measurement of the particular traffic metric associated with the path A fails to satisfy the threshold) to cause the node B to become the active node for routing the session traffic between the endpoint device R1 and the endpoint device R2 (e.g., via the path B)...)
Regarding claim 20, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches wherein packets used for determining the metric are probe packets. (Ramamurthy, col. 8, lines 5-41 where the node B (e.g., when routing the session traffic) may measure one or more traffic metrics associated with the path B...The node A may measure one or more traffic metrics associated with the path A....compare the measurements of one or more traffic metrics associated with the path B and the measurements of the one or more traffic metrics associated with the path A and may determine that a particular traffic metric is enhanced on the path A relative to the path B...)
Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11477117) in view of Verzun et al. (U.S. PGPub 2018/0359811) further in view of MacAdam et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7974278).
Regarding claim 3, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches all of the features of claim 1. However, Ramamurthy-Verzun does not explicitly teach wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are established using a lossy link protocol.
MacAdam teaches wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are established using a lossy link protocol. (MacAdam, col. 5, lines 20-44 ...continuous transmission protocol is a lossy packet-based communication protocol that requires data packets that are not correctly received by the packet switch…; see claim 6 the second port is further configured to select...a lossy communication protocol for outputting the first data packet from the packet switch.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Ramamurthy-Verzun and MacAdam to provide the technique of the first logical link path and the second logical link path are established using a lossy link protocol of MacAdam in the system of Ramamurthy-Verzun in order to improve communication between endpoint devices compliant with different communication standards (MacAdam, see col. 2, lines 5-12).
Regarding claim 17, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches all of the features of claim 16. However, Ramamurthy-Verzun does not explicitly teach wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are established using a lossy link protocol.
MacAdam teaches wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are established using a lossy link protocol. (MacAdam, col. 5, lines 20-44 ...continuous transmission protocol is a lossy packet-based communication protocol that requires data packets that are not correctly received by the packet switch…; see claim 6 the second port is further configured to select...a lossy communication protocol for outputting the first data packet from the packet switch.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Ramamurthy and MacAdam to provide the technique of the first logical link path and the second logical link path are established using a lossy link protocol of MacAdam in the system of Ramamurthy in order to improve communication between endpoint devices compliant with different communication standards (MacAdam, see col. 2, lines 5-12).
Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11477117) in view of Verzun et al. (U.S. PGPub 2018/0359811) further in view of Li et al. (U.S. PGPub 2012/0284416).
Regarding claim 6, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches all of the features of claim 1. However, Ramamurthy-Verzun does not explicitly teach wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are defined by a 3-tuple comprising Internet Protocol (IP) addresses and ports.
Li teaches wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are defined by a 3-tuple comprising Internet Protocol (IP) addresses and ports. (Li, see paragraph 0086-0089 where include a 3-tuple rule, which may include the peer ID of the branch device, the IP address of the destination device, and the port of the destination device...If a match is found against a 3-tuple entry (e.g., the peer ID of the branch device and the destination IP address and port number of the flow match a 3-tuple entry), then a corresponding new flow is added to the connection table...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Ramamurthy-Verzun and Li to provide the technique of the first logical link path and the second logical link path are defined by a 3-tuple comprising Internet Protocol (IP) addresses and ports of Li in the system of Ramamurthy-Verzun in order to optimize traffic flow over a communication path (LI, see paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 13, Ramamurthy-Verzun teaches all of the features of claim 10. However, Ramamurthy-Verzun does not explicitly teach wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are defined by a 3-tuple comprising Internet Protocol (IP) addresses and ports.
Li teaches wherein the first logical link path and the second logical link path are defined by a 3-tuple comprising Internet Protocol (IP) addresses and ports. (Li, see paragraph 0086-0089 where include a 3-tuple rule, which may include the peer ID of the branch device, the IP address of the destination device, and the port of the destination device...If a match is found against a 3-tuple entry (e.g., the peer ID of the branch device and the destination IP address and port number of the flow match a 3-tuple entry), then a corresponding new flow is added to the connection table...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Ramamurthy-Verzun and Li to provide the technique of the first logical link path and the second logical link path are defined by a 3-tuple comprising Internet Protocol (IP) addresses and ports of Li in the system of Ramamurthy-Verzun in order to optimize traffic flow over a communication path (LI, see paragraph 0038).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. This includes:
U.S. PGPub 2020/0053018, which describes a scheduling device for managing a packet queue of a communication gateway;
U.S. PGPub 2007/0130367, which describes a method for enabling a server to support local prioritization of incoming connection requests; and
U.S. PGPub 2019/0386913, which describes multipath selection system and method for datacenter-centric metro networks.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MENG VANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7023. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-2PM, 3PM-5PM.
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.
/MENG VANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443