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 .
1. Claims 1-3, 9-12, and 16-17 are currently pending in this application.
Claims 4-8 and 13-15 are subject to restriction in accordance with 06/26/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 9-12, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiang Xiao et al. (CN 114064572: Object storage method and system based on Hash algorithm), hereinafter Xiao, and, in view of Liu et al. (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2012/0246163 A1), hereinafter Liu.
2. With respect to claims 1 and 9, Xiao taught a hash table storage method (page 2, claim 10, lines 1-4), comprising: obtaining a keyword and data of a hash table to be stored (page 3, Background, lines 8-18); obtaining a first hash value and a second hash value of the keyword (page 3, Background, lines 8-18, where the key is the keyword); storing the second hash value of the hash table to be stored in a first memory according to the first hash value (page 3, Background, lines 8-18, the different buckets); and storing the keyword and the data of the flow table to be stored in a second memory (page 3, Background, lines 8-18, the first and second stored key-value pair).
However, Xiao did not explicitly state that the hash table was a flow hash table. On the other hand, Liu did teach that the hash table was a flow hash table (0005). Both of the systems of Xiao and Liu are directed towards managing hash tables and therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing of the invention, to modify the teachings of Xiao, to specifically use flow hash tables, as taught by Liu, as flow hash tables were a standard table utilized in networks that were contemporary to the time of the invention.
3. As for claims 2 and 11, they are rejected on the same basis as claims 1 and 9 (respectively). In addition, Xiao taught wherein the flow table to be stored has identification information (page 3, Background, lines 19-20), and the storing the second hash value of the flow table to be stored in the first memory according to the first hash value comprises: obtaining an address of a bucket corresponding to the flow table to be stored in the first memory according to the first hash value (page 1, claim 2); and storing the identification information and the second hash value of the flow table to be stored in a slot of the bucket (page 1, claim 2).
4. As for claims 3 and 12, they are rejected on the same basis as claims 1 and 9 (respectively). In addition, Xiao taught obtaining an address of a bucket corresponding to the flow table to be stored in the second memory according to the identification information of the flow table to be stored; and storing the keyword and the data of the flow table to be stored in a slot of the bucket (page 1, claim 1, the bucket ID).
5. As for claim 10, it is rejected on the same basis as claim 1. In addition, Liu taught non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions thereon, wherein when the computer instructions are executed by a processor (0086).
6. As for claim 16, it is rejected on the same basis as claim 10. In addition, Xiao taught wherein the flow table to be stored has identification information (page 3, Background, lines 19-20), and the processor is configured to perform the following operations: obtaining an address of a bucket corresponding to the flow table to be stored in the first memory according to the first hash value; and storing the identification information and the second hash value of the flow table to be stored in a slot of the bucket (page 1, claim 1, where the flow table was previously shown by Liu: 0005).
7. As for claim 17, it is rejected on the same basis as claim 16. In addition, Xiao taught wherein the processor is configured to perform the following operations: obtaining an address of a bucket corresponding to the flow table to be stored in the second memory according to the identification information of the flow table to be stored; and storing the keyword and the data of the flow table to be stored in a slot of the bucket (page 1, claim 1. See also: page 3, Background, lines 8-18).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
(a) Kumar et al. (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2019/0087279 A1), 0019 & 0041.
(b) Segev et al. (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2019/0026502 A1), 0007-0012.
(c) Lambiri et al. (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2012/0030965 A1), 0032.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH L GREENE whose telephone number is (571)270-3730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 10:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Nicholas R. 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.
/JOSEPH L GREENE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights