Detailed Action
1. This Office Action is responsive to the Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed 06/11/2026. Claims 1, 8 and 15 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are pending for examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/11/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brar et al. (US 2023/0247027 A1), in view of Mathur et al. (US 2024/0205051 A1), hereinafter “Brar” and “Mathur” correspondingly.
6. As to claim 1, Brar teaches a system comprising:
a first cloud environment comprising a first infrastructure (i.e., establishing a private network path from a first cloud environment to a second cloud environment) (Brar, Abstract) wherein:
the first cloud environment is provided by a first cloud service provider (i.e., FIG. 1 is ahigh-level diagram of a distributed environment showing a virtual or overlay cloud network hosted by a could service provider infrastructure) (Brar, [0024]);
the first infrastructure is physically connected to a second infrastructure of a second cloud environment provided by a second cloud service provider that is different from the first cloud service provider (i.e., a multi-cloud control place (MCCP) framework that provisions for capabilities to deliver services of a particular cloud network (e.g., Oracle Cloud infrastructure (OCI)) to users on other clouds (e.g., in Microsoft Azure)) (Brar, [0018]);
the first infrastructure comprises a first set of compute resources located within the first cloud environment (i.e., the MCCP enables users of a second cloud infrastructure (e.g., Azure users) to make use of resources (e.g., database resources) provided by a first cloud infrastructure (e.g., OCI) in a way that is transparent to the user) (Brar, [0050]);
the first infrastructure is configured to form a cloud network between the first set of compute resources and a second set of compute resources located within the second cloud environment and of the second infrastructure (i.e., a multi-cloud control place (MCCP) framework that provisions for capabilities to deliver services of a particular cloud network (e.g., Oracle Cloud infrastructure (OCI)) to users on other clouds (e.g., in Microsoft Azure)) (Brar, [0049]); and
the cloud network is configured to provide a cloud service of the second cloud service provider to a customer of the first cloud service provider using the first set of compute resources and the second set of compute resources (i.e., the MCCP framework allows users (of other cloud environment(s)) to access services (e.g., PaaS services, SaaS and IaaS services) of a cloud environment, while providing with a user experience as close as possible to that of the native cloud environment(s) of the user) (Brar, [0049]).
Brar does not explicitly teach “wherein a first subnet of the first set of compute resources and a second subnet of the second set of compute resources share a private Classes Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) IP address range, wherein the private CIDR IP addresses overlap across the first infrastructure and the second infrastructure”.
In an analogous art, Mathur teaches that VNs (Virtual Networks) across which resources are shared can have partially for fully overlapping network address ranges (e.g., CIDR blocks) For example, VN 102A and VN 102B each have CIDR blocks 10.0.0.0/16. (Mathur, [0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Brar and Mathur to achieve the claimed invention to allow “resource endpoints” that enable private and secure connection to such data stores across account and virtual boundaries and also help accomplish low-latency use cases across account boundaries (Mathur, [0011]).
7. As to claim 2, Brar-Mathur teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the first infrastructure is configured to form the cloud network in response to receiving instructions from a control plane of the second infrastructure and establish a network connection between the first subnet of the first set of compute resources and the second subnet of the second set of compute resources, the first subnet being provided by a data plane of the first infrastructure (i.e., a multi-cloud control place (MCCP) framework that provisions for capabilities to deliver services of a particular cloud network (e.g., Oracle Cloud infrastructure (OCI)) to users on other clouds (e.g., in Microsoft Azure) (Brar, [0049]) and a VCN can be subdivided into one or more sub-networks such as one or more subnets. A subnet is thus a unit of configuration or a subdivision that can be created within a VCN. A VCN can have one or multiple subnets) (Brar, [0073]).
8. As to claim 3, Brar-Mathur teaches the system of claim 2, wherein the first infrastructure is configured to establish the network connection by associating Internet Protocol (IP) addresses with the first subnet, the IP addresses being within the Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) IP range associated with the second subnet (i.e., when a VCN is created, it is associated with a private overlay Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) address space, which is a range of private overlay IP addresses that are assigned to the VCN (e.g., 10.0/16), A VCN includes associated subnets, route tables, and gateways) (Brar, [0072]).
9. As to claim 4, Brar-Mathur teaches the system of claim 1, wherein a first router associated with the first cloud environment is connected to a second router associated with the second cloud environment, and wherein the first router is further connected to the first infrastructure (i.e., a VCN may be subdivided into one or more subnets. In certain embodiments, a Virtual Router (VA) configured for the VCN (referred to as the VCN VR or just VR) enables communications between the subnets of the VCN. For a subnet within a VCN, the VR represents a logical gateway for that subnet that enables the subnet (.e., the compute instances on that subnet) to communicate with endpoints on other subnets within the VCN, and with other endpoints outside the VCN) (Brar, [0078]).
10. As to claim 5, Brar-Mathur teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the first infrastructure is configured to form the cloud network by connecting virtual resources of the first set of compute resources to a virtual machine cluster of the second set of compute resources (i.e., a VCN may be subdivided into one or more subnets. In certain embodiments, a Virtual Router (VA) configured for the VCN (referred to as the VCN VR or just VR) enables communications between the subnets of the VCN. For a subnet within a VCN, the VR represents a logical gateway for that subnet that enables the subnet (.e., the compute instances on that subnet) to communicate with endpoints on other subnets within the VCN, and with other endpoints outside the VCN) (Brar, [0078]).
11. As to claim 6, Brar-Mathur teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the first infrastructure is configured to form the cloud network by connecting a first network interface card of the first set of compute resources to a second network interface card of the second set of compute resources (i.e., Each compute instance is associated with a virtual network interface card (VNIC), that enables the compute instance to participate in a subnet of a VCN. A VNIC is a logical representation of physical Network Interface Card (NIC). In general, a VNIC is an interface between an entity (e.g., a compute instance, a service) and a virtual network. A VNIC exists in a subnet, has one or more associated IP addresses, and associated security rules or policies. A VNIC is equivalent to a Layer-2 port on a switch. A VNIC is attached to a compute instance and to a subnet within a VCN) (Brar, [0074]).
12. As to claim 7, Brar- Mathur teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the first set of compute resources comprises one or more processors, and wherein the one or more processors are connected to physical resources of the second cloud service provider (i.e., The systems, subsystems, and other components depicted in FIG. 2 may be implemented in software (e.g., code, instructions, program) executed by one or more processing units (e.g., processors, cores) of the respective systems, using hardware, or combinations thereof) (Brar, [0145]).
13. As to claims 8-20, claims 8-20 are corresponding method and non-transitory computer-readable storage media claims that recite similar limitations as of system claims 1-7 and do not contain any additional limitations with respect to novelty and/or inventive steps; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
Response to Arguments
14. Applicant’s arguments filed 06/11/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection.
15. Further references of interest are cited on Form PTO-892, which is an attachment to this Office Action.
16. A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE (3) months from the mailing date of this communication. See 37 CFR 1.134.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANG N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-3886.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s SPE, KAMAL B. DIVECHA, can be reached at (571) 272-5863. The fax phone number for the organization is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from the Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications 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 or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QUANG N NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights