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 .
Claim Status
This office action is in response to the communication(s) filed on 08/13/2024.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are currently presenting for examination.
Claim(s) 1, 11, and 20 is/are independent claim(s).
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected.
This action has been made NON-FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 8 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: the variable “x” is not defined in the claim. 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 11-18, and 20 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1, 3-7, 10, 11-13, 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,569 (hereinafter referred to as Patent '69). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims merely rephrase and omit limitations from the patented claims, where both claim sets have overlapping scope.
Regarding claim 1, Patent '69 discloses a network device, comprising: a virtual circuit configured to: establish a first virtual port to receive a first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 1-11); select a physical transceiver port from a plurality of physical transceiver ports (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 12-18); receive the first incoming data stream through the first virtual port (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 19-21); form an output data stream to run at a predetermined fixed data rate (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 22-25), wherein the predetermined fixed data rate associated with the physical transceiver port is greater than a first non-predetermined data rate of the first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 12-18), and wherein the output data stream incorporates the data from the first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 22-29); and forward the output data stream to the selected physical transceiver port (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 30-31).
Regarding claim 2, Patent '69 discloses the network device of claim 1, further comprises the plurality of physical transceiver ports (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 1-3).
Regarding claim 3, Patent '69 discloses the network device of claim 2, wherein the virtual circuit is coupled to the plurality of physical transceiver ports (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 5-6).
Regarding claim 4, Patent '69 discloses the network device of claim 1, wherein the data from the first incoming data stream that is incorporated within the output data stream is timed to selected pulses within a transmit clock signal that runs at the predetermined fixed data rate (Patent ’69, claim 3).
Regarding claim 5, Patent '69 discloses the network device of claim 4, wherein the virtual circuit is further configured to: receive a first transfer request from a processor to transmit the first incoming data stream at the first non-predetermined data rate (Patent ’69, claim 1, line(s) 7-9).
Regarding claim 6, Patent '69 discloses the network device of claim 5, wherein the virtual circuit is further configured to: receive a second transfer request from the processor to transmit a second incoming data stream at a second non-predetermined data rate that is less than the predetermined fixed data rate of the selected physical transceiver port; establish a second virtual port to receive the second incoming data stream; and determine whether the selected physical transceiver port has an available data rate that is greater than the second non-predetermined data rate (Patent ’69, claim 4).
Regarding claim 7, Patent '69 discloses the network device of claim 6, wherein the virtual circuit is further configured to: receive the second incoming data stream at the second non-predetermined data rate from the processor after determining the available data rate; when the available data rate of the selected physical transceiver port is greater than the second non-predetermined data rate, generate a revised output data stream to incorporate data from the first incoming data stream and the second incoming data stream, wherein the data from the first incoming data stream and the second incoming data stream are timed to selected transmit clock signals; and forward the revised output data stream to the selected physical transceiver port (Patent ’69, claim 5).
Regarding claim 8, Patent '69 discloses the network device of claim 7, wherein: the predetermined fixed data rate has a data rate of x bits per second, and the virtual circuit is further configured to: sub-divide the predetermined fixed data rate of x bits per second of the selected physical transceiver port into fractional parts, assign the fractional parts to the first incoming data stream and the second incoming data stream, wherein the first non-predetermined data rate and the second non-predetermined data rate are less than the predetermined fixed data rate of the selected physical transceiver port, and combine the fractional parts such that the combined bits per second of the combined data stream are equal to or less than the predetermined fixed data rate of x bits per second of the selected physical transceiver port (Patent ’69, claim 6).
Regarding claim 9, Patent '69 discloses the network device of claim 6, wherein the virtual circuit is further configured to: determine whether the selected physical transceiver port has the available data rate that is greater than the second non-predetermined data rate, wherein the available data rate includes subtracting the first non-predetermined data rate from the predetermined fixed data rate, and compare the available data rate to the second non-predetermined data rate (Patent ’69, claim 7).
Regarding claim 11, Patent '69 discloses a method of operating a network device, the method comprising: establishing a first virtual port for receiving a first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 1-7); selecting a physical transceiver port from a plurality of physical transceiver ports (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 8-14); receiving the first incoming data stream through the first virtual port (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 15-17); forming an output data stream to run at a predetermined fixed data rate (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 18-19), wherein the predetermined fixed data rate associated with the physical transceiver port is greater than a first non-predetermined data rate of the first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 8-14), and wherein the output data stream incorporates the data from the first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 19-21); and forwarding the output data stream to the selected physical transceiver port (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 26-27)
Regarding claim 12, Patent '69 discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the plurality of physical transceiver ports is comprised in the network device (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 10-11).
Regarding claim 13, Patent '69 discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the data from the first incoming data stream that is incorporated within the output data stream is timed to selected pulses within a transmit clock signal that runs at the predetermined fixed data rate (Patent ’69, claim 12).
Regarding claim 14, Patent '69 discloses the method of claim 13, further comprising: receiving a first transfer request from a processor to transmit the first incoming data stream at the first non-predetermined data rate (Patent ’69, claim 11, line(s) 3-5).
Regarding claim 15, Patent '69 discloses the method of claim 14, further comprising: receiving a second transfer request from the processor to transmit a second incoming data stream at a second non-predetermined data rate that is less than the predetermined fixed data rate of the selected physical transceiver port; establishing a second virtual port to receive the second incoming data stream; and determining whether the selected physical transceiver port has an available data rate that is greater than the second non-predetermined data rate (Patent ’69, claim 13).
Regarding claim 16, Patent '69 discloses the method of claim 15, further comprising: receiving the second incoming data stream at the second non-predetermined data rate from the processor after determining the available data rate; when the available data rate of the selected physical transceiver port is greater than the second non-predetermined data rate, generating a revised output data stream to incorporate data from the first incoming data stream and the second incoming data stream, wherein the data from the first incoming data stream and the second incoming data stream are timed to selected transmit clock signals; and forwarding the revised output data stream to the selected physical transceiver port (Patent ’69, claim 13).
Regarding claim 17, Patent '69 discloses the method of claim 16, wherein: the predetermined fixed data rate has a data rate of x bits per second, and the method further comprises: sub-dividing the predetermined fixed data rate of x bits per second of the selected physical transceiver port into fractional parts, assigning the fractional parts to the first incoming data stream and the second incoming data stream, wherein the first non-predetermined data rate and the second non-predetermined data rate are less than the predetermined fixed data rate of the selected physical transceiver port, and combining the fractional parts such that the combined bits per second of the combined data stream are equal to or less than the predetermined fixed data rate of x bits per second of the selected physical transceiver port (Patent ’69, claim 6).
Regarding claim 18, Patent '69 discloses the method of claim 15, further comprising: determining whether the selected physical transceiver port has the available data rate that is greater than the second non-predetermined data rate, wherein the available data rate includes subtracting the first non-predetermined data rate from the predetermined fixed data rate, and comparing the available data rate to the second non-predetermined data rate (Patent ’69, claim 7).
Regarding claim 20, Patent '69 discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having embedded therein program instructions, which when executed by a processor cause the processor to execute a method of operating a network device, the method comprising: establishing a first virtual port for receiving a first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 20, line(s) 1-10); selecting a physical transceiver port from a plurality of physical transceiver ports (Patent ’69, claim 20, line(s) 11-17); receiving the first incoming data stream through the first virtual port (Patent ’69, claim 20, line(s) 18-20); forming an output data stream to run at a predetermined fixed data rate (Patent ’69, claim 20, line(s) 21-22), wherein the predetermined fixed data rate associated with the physical transceiver port is greater than a first non-predetermined data rate of the first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 20, line(s) 11-17), and wherein the output data stream incorporates the data from the first incoming data stream (Patent ’69, claim 20, line(s) 22-24); and forwarding the output data stream to the selected physical transceiver port (Patent ’69, claim 20, line(s) 29-30).
Claims 10 and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 11 of of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,569 (hereinafter referred to as Patent '69) in view of US_20180213462_A1_Nakata.
Regarding claim 10, Patent '69 discloses a network device of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein a data transfer rate of the first virtual port is a fraction of a maximum data transfer rate of the selected physical transceiver port.
Nakata discloses wherein a data transfer rate of the first virtual port is a fraction of a maximum data transfer rate of the selected physical transceiver port (Nakata figures 2, 6, 7, paragraphs 29, the transmission capacity of the virtual ports is 100Mbps, and the transmission capacity of the wireless ports can be 100-300Mbps).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Nakata’s the transmission capacity of the virtual ports is 100Mbps, and the transmission capacity of the wireless ports can be 100-300Mbps in Patent '69’s system to adjust the transmission rate according to system need. This method for improving the system of Patent '69 was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Nakata. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Patent '69 and Nakata to obtain the invention as specified in claim 10.
Regarding claim 19, Patent '69 discloses a network device of claim 11, but does not disclose wherein a data transfer rate of the first virtual port is a fraction of a maximum data transfer rate of the selected physical transceiver port.
Nakata discloses wherein a data transfer rate of the first virtual port is a fraction of a maximum data transfer rate of the selected physical transceiver port (Nakata figures 2, 6, 7, paragraphs 29, the transmission capacity of the virtual ports is 100Mbps, and the transmission capacity of the wireless ports can be 100-300Mbps).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Nakata’s the transmission capacity of the virtual ports is 100Mbps, and the transmission capacity of the wireless ports can be 100-300Mbps in Patent '69’s system to adjust the transmission rate according to system need. This method for improving the system of Patent '69 was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Nakata. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Patent '69 and Nakata to obtain the invention as specified in claim 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 10-12, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US_20180213462_A1_Nakata.
Regarding claim 1, Nakata discloses a network device, comprising: a virtual circuit (Nakata figure 2) configured to: establish a first virtual port to receive a first incoming data stream (Nakata figures 2, 7, virtual port VP1C receive transmission data from LAG controller); select a physical transceiver port from a plurality of physical transceiver ports; receive the first incoming data stream through the first virtual port (Nakata figure 7, wireless port P1 is selected for data transmission for the virtual port VP1C); form an output data stream to run at a predetermined fixed data rate (Nakata figure 7, and paragraph 53, “This enables to transmit the transmission data at a transmission rate of 100 Mbps through the wireless port 110 “P1” and at a transmission rate of 300 Mbps through the wireless port 110 “P2” without discarding”), wherein the predetermined fixed data rate associated with the physical transceiver port is greater than a first non-predetermined data rate of the first incoming data stream (Nakata figure 2, “…The virtual port controller 140 determines, for each of the plurality of wireless ports 110, a number of virtual ports 120 to be used for data transmission among the virtual ports 120 assigned to the wireless port 110, in accordance with the transmission capacity of the wireless port 110”, and paragraph 57, “…when the total of the transmission capacities of the wireless ports 110 is equal to or greater than the transmission rate of the transmission data…”), and wherein the output data stream incorporates the data from the first incoming data stream (Nakata figure 7); and forward the output data stream to the selected physical transceiver port (Nakata figure 7, virtual port VP1C forwards the transmission data to the wireless port P1).
Regarding claim 2, Nakata discloses the network device of claim 1, further comprises the plurality of physical transceiver ports (Nakata figure 7, the wireless ports P1-P2).
Regarding claim 3, Nakata discloses the network device of claim 2, wherein the virtual circuit is coupled to the plurality of physical transceiver ports (Nakata figures 2, 7).
Regarding claim 10, Nakata discloses the network device of claim 1, wherein a data transfer rate of the first virtual port is a fraction of a maximum data transfer rate of the selected physical transceiver port (Nakata figures 2, 6, 7, paragraphs 29, the transmission capacity of the virtual ports is 100Mbps, and the transmission capacity of the wireless ports can be 100-300Mbps).
Regarding claim 11, Nakata discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, Nakata discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 19, Nakata discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 10.
Regarding claim 20, Nakata discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 1, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having embedded therein program instructions, which when executed by a processor cause the processor to execute a method (Nakata paragraph 14).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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) 4-5 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20180213462_A1_Nakata in view of US_5818839_A_Sterne.
Regarding claim 4, Nakata discloses the network device of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the data from the first incoming data stream that is incorporated within the output data stream is timed to selected pulses within a transmit clock signal that runs at the predetermined fixed data rate.
Sterne discloses wherein the data from the first incoming data stream that is incorporated within the output data stream is timed to selected pulses within a transmit clock signal that runs at the predetermined fixed data rate (Sterne figure 2, and column 3 lines 34-40, “…Clock Selection Device 20 monitors each of the data rates and selects the fastest rate to provide a master clock pulse to Data Scheduling Device 24. As shown in FIG. 2 Scheduling Device 24 includes calendars 26, 28 and 30 wherein each calendar”).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Sterne’s the Clock Selection Device monitors each of the data rates and selects the fastest rate to provide a master clock pulse to Data Scheduling Device in Nakata’s system for generating the necessary clock signals utilizing a single timing reference (Sterne abstract). This method for improving the system of Nakata was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Sterne. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Nakata and Sterne to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Nakata and Sterne disclose the network device of claim 4, wherein the virtual circuit is further configured to: receive a first transfer request from a processor to transmit the first incoming data stream at the first non-predetermined data rate (Nakata figures 2, and paragraph 35, “…The virtual port controller 140 then selects the determined number of virtual ports 120 as virtual ports 120 to be used in the data transmission from among the virtual ports 120 assigned to the wireless port 110…”).
Regarding claim 13, Nakata and Sterne disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 4.
Regarding claim 14, Nakata and Sterne disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 5.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9, and 15-18 would be allowable if the nonstatutory double patenting rejection to these claims set forth in this Office action is overcome and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Prior art US_20070153697_A1_Kwan discloses a network device in a data network, for shaping and metering traffic through a network device at a client and virtual port levels. The network device include token buckets, each token bucket associated with one of clients and virtual ports and configured to process information based on a predefined bandwidth and a strict priority/weighted deficit round robin. A maximum rate shaper module and a minimum rate meter module shape and meter whether any of the clients or virtual ports have exceeded a predefined threshold. A scheduler is configured to schedule services of the clients and to calculate a new bandwidth allocation for at least one of the clients or virtual ports when the at least one of the clients or virtual ports has exceeded the predefined threshold, the new bandwidth allocation replacing the predefined bandwidth and being proportional to the predefined bandwidth for each of the clients or virtual ports. (Kwan figure 5)
Prior art US_20120027014_A1_Mack-Crane discloses a switch Receive a frame from a physical port, Select a virtual interface based on the external VID, Obtain an internal VID from a default VID for the virtual port, and Select ports on which to transmit the frame using the virtual interface as a receiving port, the intern.al VID, and contents of the frame. (Mack-Crane figure 6, paragraphs 45-46).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEIBIN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3695. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30AM - 6:00PM.
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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571)272-8586. 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.
/W.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights