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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to the Amendment filed on 4/29/26. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
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, 2, 5, 7, 11, 12, 14,15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levy-Abegnoli et al., US Pub. No.20080137659 in view of
Chaturmohta et al., US Pub. No.20210135982.
As to claim 1, Levy-Abegnoli discloses a packet transmission method, comprising:
receiving, by a validation device (triggering node16 fig.3), an address prefix from
a sending device (access router 12 fig.3) and sending, by the validation device, a
response packet to the sending device, wherein the response packet indicates usage
status information, of the address prefix, at a receiving device (using the triggering node
for sending a message to the access router that includes its CGA address and its public
key for validation of the CGA address and upon successful validation of the
cryptographically generated address, outputting the preempting IPv6 packet based on
the prescribed flow label field value. As described previously, any non-priority packet is
either blocked (if the preemptive blocking service 42 is implemented) or limited to low
priority status, see [0032] and [0040]).
Levy-Abegnoli does not specifically disclose receiving a source address prefix (PSA), wherein the PSA packet comprising a source address prefix. However, Chaturmohta discloses receiving a source address prefix (PSA), wherein the PSA packet comprising a source address prefix (using the route monitoring component to perform new prefix validation on routes that are unrecognized. An unrecognized route is a route the system has never encountered previously and a prefix associated with that source is included, see [0051] to [0054]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to implement Chaturmohta's teachings into the computer system of Levy-Abegnoli to control data information because it would have identified an anomalous route or a fault alerting system and thus generated one or more alerts associated with the anomalous routes (see Chaturmohta's [0052]).
As to claim 2, Levy-Abegnoli does not specifically disclose the validation device is the receiving device. However, Chaturmohta discloses the validation device is the receiving device (identifying and validating that new prefix automatically at the server through comparison against multiple open source and proprietary databases as well as internal databases, see [0051] to [0054]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill
in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to implement
Chaturmohta's teachings into the computer system of Levy-Abegnoli to control data
information because it would have identified an anomalous route or a fault alerting
system and thus generated one or more alerts associated with the anomalous routes
(see Chaturmohta's [0052]).
As to claim 5, Chaturmohta discloses the validation device is a control device, and the obtaining, by a validation device, and the address prefix from a sending device comprises: receiving, by the validation device, an-a source prefix advertisement (SPA) packet from the receiving device, wherein the SPA packet comprises the source address prefix (identifying and validating that new prefix automatically at the server through comparison against multiple open source and proprietary databases as well as internal databases. The system propagates that validation to all routers on the network. In some examples, the new prefix validation 122 detects and validates any new prefix advertisement on the internet for a user/entity, see [0051] to [0054]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to implement Chaturmohta's teachings into the computer system of Levy-Abegnoli to control data information because it would have identified an anomalous route or a fault alerting system and thus generated one or more alerts associated with the anomalous routes (see Chaturmohta's [0052]).
As to claim 7, Levy-Abegnoli discloses sending by the validation mode the first alarm
information to the receiving device, wherein the first alarm information to provide a
suggestion mode for validating the source address prefix (if the acknowledgment that
authentication failed, the routing services resource also can send in step a routing
message to the next hop router specifying that the preemptive blocking services should
be implemented for any IPv6 packet output from the IPv6 access router, see [0035] to
[0036]).
Claims 11, 14, 17 are rejected for the same reasons set forth in claims 1, 5 and 7
respectively.
Claims 12 and 15 are rejected for the same reasons set forth in claims 2 and 2
respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 16 and 18-20 are objected to as being dependent
upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form
including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 12, 14,15 and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Khanh Dinh whose telephone number is (571) 272-3936. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.m. to 5:00 P.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
supervisor, Umar Cheema, can be reached on (571) 270-3037. The fax phone number
for this group is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published
applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status
information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For
more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you
have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business
Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for patents
P O Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
/KHANH Q DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Prosecution Insights