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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "network card management module", "virtual network card device creation module", "virtual network card device deletion module", "network protocol interface module" and "device interface module” in claim 8-10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim limitations “"network card management module", "virtual network card device creation module", "virtual network card device deletion module", "network protocol interface module" and "device interface module”” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. ¶ 0049 – 0050 and Fig. 5 of specification of the application as filed describe those modules as parts of a software program. Therefore, the claims 8-11are indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 9-11 are also rejected as the same reason as Claim 8 which they depend.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aluvala et al. (US PG PUB 20170078336), hereinafter "Aluvala", in views of Paul et al. (US PG PUB 20200089517), hereinafter "Paul".
Regarding Claim 1, Aluvala discloses:
An application state network card driving method (i.e. method/device for providing virtual private network connectivity on a per-application basis) (Abstract),
comprising the following steps of:
initializing a system (i.e. initialization process 103 may initialize a new instance of an application) (103 – Fig. 1, 203 – Fig. 2 and ¶ 0023);
establishing a physical network card hardware device channel (i.e. data communication path between network tunnel adaptor 113 and physical network adaptor [i.e. a physical network card hardware device channel] may be established for packet transmission) (¶ 0014);
creating a virtual network card device (i.e. the monitor application 106 can create a virtual network adaptor or similar virtual network interface [i.e. a virtual network card device] for the client application 109 to use for VPN traffic) (216 – Fig. 2 and ¶ 0028),
which comprises: opening a VPN service (i.e. VPN configuration 126 may be specified with parameters, e.g. a username, a password, a digital certificate, an address of a VPN server, a communications protocol to open a VPN connection [i.e. opening a VPN service]) (¶ 0017 and ¶ 0028),
calling a public interface in an internal class of the VPN service to preset parameters of the virtual network card device (i.e. the monitor application 106 [i.e. a public interface] implemented in client side [i.e. an internal class] of the implementation of the VPN [i.e. in an internal class of the VPN service] can create a virtual network adaptor or similar virtual network interface for the client application 109 to use for VPN traffic by specifying values/parameters [i.e. parameters of the virtual network card device] in VPN configuration 126) (¶ 0028),
calling a function in the internal class of the VPN service to create the virtual network card device (i.e. the monitor application 106 [i.e. a public interface] implemented in client side [i.e. an internal class] of the implementation of the VPN [i.e. in an internal class of the VPN service] can create a virtual network adaptor or similar virtual network interface [i.e. the virtual network card device] for the client application 109 to use for VPN traffic by specifying values/parameters in VPN configuration 126) (¶ 0028), and
saving a virtual network card device node (i.e. newly instantiated instance of client application [i.e. a virtual network card device node] may be created and saved) (¶ 0026 - 0027);
opening the physical network card hardware device channel and a virtual network card device node channel (i.e. data communication path between network tunnel adaptor 113 and physical network adaptor [i.e. a physical network card hardware device channel] may be opened for packet transmission; data communication path between the client application 106 and virtual network adaptor or similar virtual network interface may be also established for VPN traffic/connection [i.e. a virtual network card device node channel]) (Fig. 3, ¶ 0014, ¶ 0028 and ¶ 0038 - 0039);
carrying out data communication between the system and the physical network card hardware device (i.e. packets sent [i.e. carrying out data communication] by the client application 109 [i.e. the system] to the network tunnel adaptor 113 can be injected by the network tunnel adaptor 113 into the network stack of the operating system for transmission across a network using a physical network adaptor [i.e. the physical network card hardware device] installed on the client device 100) (¶ 0014),
deleting the virtual network card device (i.e. the virtual network interface [i.e. the virtual network card device] may be subsequently destroyed) (¶ 0008, ¶ 0021 and ¶ 0034), which comprises:
closing the physical network card hardware device channel and the virtual network card device node channel (i.e. the monitor application 106 closes data communication path between network tunnel adaptor 113 and physical network adaptor [i.e. the physical network card hardware device channel], and the VPN connection [i.e. the virtual network card device node channel]) (¶ 0028 and ¶ 0034),
calling a node closing function in system functions to close the virtual network card device node (i.e. the monitor application 106 [i.e. a node closing function in system functions] may close or disable the VPN connection associated with newly instantiated instance of client application [i.e. close the virtual network card device node]) (¶ 0021, ¶ 0026 - 0027 and ¶ 0034), and
calling a service closing function in the system functions to close the VPN service (i.e. the monitor application 106 [i.e. a service closing function in the system functions] closes the VPN connection) (226 – Fig. 2 and ¶ 0034).
However, Aluvala does not explicitly disclose:
reading, by the virtual network card device, protocol layer packet data in the virtual network card device node, and transmitting the data to the physical network card hardware device through a network protocol interface module and a device interface module in sequence; and receiving, by the device interface module, the data sent by the physical network card hardware device, transmitting the data to the network protocol interface module, then transmitting the data to the virtual network card device through the network protocol interface module, and writing, by the virtual network card device, the data into the virtual network card device node.
On the other hand, in the same field of endeavor, Paul teaches:
carrying out data communication between the system and the physical network card hardware device (i.e. the method/system may carry out communication of inbound and outbound packets between HIVE [i.e. the system] and pNIC [i.e. the physical network card hardware device]) (103 & 108 - Fig. 1 and ¶ 0017 - 0018) which comprises:
reading, by the virtual network card device, protocol layer packet data in the virtual network card device node (i.e. vNIC 120 [i.e. the virtual network card device] may obtain/read outbound packets [i.e. protocol layer packet data] of an application in the HIVE [i.e. the virtual network card device node]) (103 & 120 – Fig. 1, Fig. 2 and ¶ 0018 - 0019), and
transmitting the data to the physical network card hardware device through a network protocol interface module and a device interface module in sequence (i.e. the method/system may transmit outbound packets [i.e. the data] to the pNIC [i.e. the physical network card hardware device] through hypervisor 102 [i.e. a network protocol interface module] and flow steering engine FSE [i.e. a device interface module] in sequence) (102 & 118 – Fig. 1, ¶ 0019 and ¶ 0029); and
receiving, by the device interface module, the data sent by the physical network card hardware device (i.e. the flow steering engine FSE [i.e. the device interface module] receive inbound packets [i.e. the data] sent by the pNIC 108 [i.e. the physical network card hardware device) (Fig. 1 and ¶ 0018 – 0019),
transmitting the data to the network protocol interface module, then transmitting the data to the virtual network card device through the network protocol interface module (i.e. the flow steering engine FSE transmit the inbound packets [i.e. the data] to the hypervisor 102 [i.e. the network protocol interface module], then the inbound packets [i.e. the data] are transmitted to vNIC 120 [i.e. the virtual network card device] through the hypervisor 102 [i.e. the network protocol interface module]) (Abstract, Fig. 1 and ¶ 0018 – 0019), and
writing, by the virtual network card device, the data into the virtual network card device node (i.e. the inbound packets [i.e. the data] is received [i.e. written into] by the HIVE [i.e. the virtual network card device node] from vNIC 120 [i.e. the virtual network card device]) (Abstract, Fig. 1 and ¶ 0018 – 0019).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method/system of Aluvala to include the features for reading, by the virtual network card device, protocol layer packet data in the virtual network card device node, and transmitting the data to the physical network card hardware device through a network protocol interface module and a device interface module in sequence; and receiving, by the device interface module, the data sent by the physical network card hardware device, transmitting the data to the network protocol interface module, then transmitting the data to the virtual network card device through the network protocol interface module, and writing, by the virtual network card device, the data into the virtual network card device node as taught by Paul so in order to enable the virtual network card device to MAC and IP addresses of the physical network card hardware device (¶ 0017 - 0018).
Regarding Claim2, Aluvala and Paul disclose, in particular Paul teaches:
wherein, in a communication process, the protocol layer packet data is in transparent transmission among the virtual network card device, the network protocol interface module, the device interface module and the physical network card hardware device (i.e. inbound and outbound packets [i.e. the protocol layer packet data] are communicated between pNIC and HIVE through flow steering engine FSE, Hypervisor an vNIC) (Fig. 1 and ¶ 0018 – 0019).
The prior art used in the rejection of the current claim is combined using the same motivations as was applied in claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 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.
Claims 8-11 would be allowable if applicant amends the claims for overcoming the 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOE MIN HLAING whose telephone number is (303)297-4282. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM - 5PM.
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, Christopher Parry can be reached at 571-272-8328. 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.
/Soe Hlaing/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2451