DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-22 have been examined and are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
3. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/26/2024 has been found to be in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
5. The drawings were received on 8/26/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
6. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Double Patenting
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-22 (hereinafter “Application”) are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,101,240 B2 (hereinafter “Patent1”). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the Application (as described below) are transparently found in the Patent1, either in a one-to-one fashion (claim to claim) or in a one-to-many fashion (claim to multiple claims) with indistinguishable wording variations, and therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. Take an example of comparing claim 1 of the Application and claim 1 of the Patent1:
Application, Claim 1:
A network device configured to operate in a communication network, the network device comprising:
a processor configured to:
determine a timestamping method for communicating timing information corresponding to transmission of a timing message to another network device,
the timestamping method being selected from a set of multiple timestamping methods that the network device is configured to perform, the set of multiple timestamping methods including:
i) a one-step timestamping method, and ii) a two-step timestamping method, generate a control header corresponding to the timing message, including: generating the control header to include a first field and a second field, the second field indicating a type of information within the first field, generating the first field to include information that indicates the timestamping method determined by the processor, and generate the second field to indicate that the first field includes the information indicating the timestamping method determined by the processor; and the processor being further configured to: transfer the timing message to timestamping circuitry, and transfer the control header to the timestamping circuitry to indicate to the timestamping circuitry the timestamping method to be performed by the timestamping circuitry in connection with transmitting the timing message to the other network device.
Patent1, Claim 1:
A network device configured to operate in a communication network, the network device comprising:
a first processor configured to:
determine a timestamping method for communicating timing information corresponding to transmission of a first packet by the network device to a receiving device, wherein the timestamping method determined by the controller is selected from a set of multiple timestamping methods that a second processor of the network device is configured to perform, the set of multiple timestamping methods including: i) a one-step timestamping method, and ii) a two-step timestamping method, and transfer, to the second processor of the network device, i) a timing message corresponding to the first packet, and ii) information that indicates the timestamping method determined by the first processor, wherein when the timestamping method is the one-step method,
the timing message includes a timestamp that is set using a first clock circuit, the timestamp indicative of a time of transmission of the first packet by the network device; a memory included in, or coupled to the second processor; and the second processor, being configured to: determine which timestamping method is to be performed by the second processor based on analyzing the information that indicates the timestamping method determined by the first processor, the second processor having a timestamping engine configured to: determine additional timing information corresponding to the transmission of the first packet by the network device to the receiving device using a second clock circuit different than the first clock circuit, in response to the second processor determining that the timestamping method is the one-step method, embed the additional timing information in the first packet, and in response to the second processor determining that the timestamping method is the two-step method, store the additional timing information in the memory for subsequent inclusion in a second packet that is to be transmitted by the network device after transmitting the first packet; the second processor being further configured to transmit the first packet from the network device, the first packet having, when the timestamping method is the one-step method, i) the timestamp set using the first clock circuit and ii) the additional timing information determined using the second clock circuit.
Claim 2 of the Application corresponds to claim 1 of the Patent1;
Claim 3 of the Application corresponds to claim 2 of the Patent1;
Claim 4 of the Application corresponds to claim 3 of the Patent1;
Claim 5 of the Application corresponds to claim 7 of the Patent1;
Claim 6 of the Application corresponds to claim 1 of the Patent1;
Claim 7 of the Application corresponds to claim 1 of the Patent1;
Claim 8 of the Application corresponds to claim 5 of the Patent1;
Claim 9 of the Application corresponds to claims 1 and 3 of the Patent1;
Claim 10 of the Application corresponds to claim 1 of the Patent1;
Claim 11 of the Application corresponds to claim 9 of the Patent1;
Claim 12 of the Application corresponds to claim 11 of the Patent1;
Claim 13 of the Application corresponds to claim 11 of the Patent1;
Claim 14 of the Application corresponds to claim 12 of the Patent1;
Claim 15 of the Application corresponds to claim 13 of the Patent1;
Claim 16 of the Application corresponds to claim 11 and 17 of the Patent1;
Claim 17 of the Application corresponds to claim 11 and 15 of the Patent1;
Claim 18 of the Application corresponds to claim 15 of the Patent1;
Claim 19 of the Application corresponds to claim 11 of the Patent1;
Claim 20 of the Application corresponds to claim 14 of the Patent1;
Claim 21 of the Application corresponds to claim 11 and 14 of the Patent1; and
Claim 22 of the Application corresponds to claim 19 of the Patent1.
9. Claims 1-22 (hereinafter “Application”) are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,074,693 B2 (hereinafter “Patent2”). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the Application (as described below) are transparently found in the Patent2, either in a one-to-one fashion (claim to claim) or in a one-to-many fashion (claim to multiple claims) with indistinguishable wording variations, and therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. Take an example of comparing claim 1 of the Application and claim 1 of the Patent2:
Application, Claim 1:
A network device configured to operate in a communication network, the network device comprising:
a processor configured to:
determine a timestamping method for communicating timing information corresponding to transmission of a timing message to another network device,
the timestamping method being selected from a set of multiple timestamping methods that the network device is configured to perform, the set of multiple timestamping methods including:
i) a one-step timestamping method, and ii) a two-step timestamping method, generate a control header corresponding to the timing message, including: generating the control header to include a first field and a second field, the second field indicating a type of information within the first field, generating the first field to include information that indicates the timestamping method determined by the processor, and generate the second field to indicate that the first field includes the information indicating the timestamping method determined by the processor; and the processor being further configured to: transfer the timing message to timestamping circuitry, and transfer the control header to the timestamping circuitry to indicate to the timestamping circuitry the timestamping method to be performed by the timestamping circuitry in connection with transmitting the timing message to the other network device.
Patent1, Claim 1:
A network device configured to operate in a communication network, the network device comprising:
a memory; and
a processor that comprises or is coupled to the memory, the processor being configured to:
receive i) a timing message and ii) a control header corresponding to the timing message, the control header including an extension field and an extension type field, the extension type field indicating a type of information within the extension field, the extension field having information that indicates a timestamping method for communicating timing information corresponding to transmission of the timing message by the network device, the timestamping method being selected from a set of multiple timestamping methods that network device is configured to perform, the set of multiple timestamping methods including:
i) a one-step timestamping method, and ii) a two-step timestamping method, extract the information that indicates the timestamping method from the extension field within the control header, determine whether the two-step timing timestamping method is to be performed based on analyzing the information that indicates the timestamping method extracted from the extension field of the control header, transmit the timing message within a first packet from the network device, determine timing information corresponding to the transmission of the first packet by the network device, and in response to the processor determining that the timestamping method is the two-step method, store the timing information in the memory for subsequent inclusion in a second packet that is to be transmitted by the network device after transmitting the first packet.
Claim 2 of the Application corresponds to claims 2 and 5 of Patent2;
Claim 3 of the Application corresponds to claim 7 of Patent2;
Claim 4 of the Application corresponds to claim 8 of Patent2;
Claim 5 of the Application corresponds to claim 1 of Patent2;
Claim 6 of the Application corresponds to claim 5 of Patent2;
Claim 7 of the Application corresponds to claim 1 of Patent2;
Claim 8 of the Application corresponds to claims 1 and 5 of Patent2;
Claim 9 of the Application corresponds to claims 1 and 8 of Patent2;
Claim 10 of the Application corresponds to claim 3 of Patent2;
Claim 11 of the Application corresponds to claim 4 of Patent2;
Claim 12 of the Application corresponds to claim 10 of Patent2;
Claim 13 of the Application corresponds to claims 11 and 14 of Patent2;
Claim 14 of the Application corresponds to claim 16 of Patent2;
Claim 15 of the Application corresponds to claim 17 of Patent2;
Claim 16 of the Application corresponds to claim 10 of Patent2;
Claim 17 of the Application corresponds to claims 10 and 14 of Patent2;
Claim 18 of the Application corresponds to claims 10 and 14 of Patent2;
Claim 19 of the Application corresponds to claim 15 of Patent2;
Claim 20 of the Application corresponds to claim 18 of Patent2;
Claim 21 of the Application corresponds to claim 12 of Patent2; and
Claim 22 of the Application corresponds to claim 13 of Patent2;
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN H ELLIOTT IV whose telephone number is (571)270-7163. The examiner can normally be reached M, T, R, F 5:00 AM-5:00 PM, W 5:00 AM-3:00 PM (EDT).
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, 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.
BENJAMIN H. ELLIOTT IV
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2474
/BENJAMIN H ELLIOTT IV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474 July 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights