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 action is in response to the communication filed on 4/23/2026.
Claims 1-20 are examined
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 14-20 are rejected.
Claims 5, 8-13 are objected.
Response to Arguments
As per Applicant’s argument / explanation dated 1/30/2026 are considered.
As per applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of new rejection. New reference of Liu along with combination of references (Bajpeyi – Laine) has been updated in the office action.
Examiner is open for phone call interview to discuss further with applicant’s representative for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18 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.
‘Reason for allowance’ to be described in following communication upon discussion with attorney.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by U.S. Publication 2022/0147364 to Li et al. (hereinafter known as “Li”) and U.S. Publication 2019/0075032 to Young et al. (hereinafter known as "Young”) and further in view of US Publication 2020/0153655 to Ogawa et al (hereinafter known as “Ogawa”).
As per claim 1 Li teaches, a frame-type device, comprising:
a primary control board comprising a primary control network card and a primary control switch chip (Li Fig 1 baseboard 11 para 28 teaches main control baseboard 11 (interpreted as primary control board). The main control baseboard 11 is in signal connection with the management network 20 through a first physical network port 41); and
at least one service board, wherein the primary control switch chip comprises a first primary control port for connecting with a first user management interface, at least one second primary control port for respectively connecting with the at least one service board (Li Fig 2 – element 27, 22 and 23, para 30-31 - teaches main control program module 22, a first physical network port 23, a second physical network port 24, and where switch chip 21 is connected to the main control program module 22), and
a third primary control port for connecting with the primary control network card (Li Fig 2 – element 25 and main control element 22, para 30-31 teaches main control program module 22 is in signal connection with a service network through the second physical network port 24, to realize information interaction with the service network. The main control program module 22 is used to monitor and manage the current baseboard and other baseboards in the server),
the primary control switch chip is configured to communicate data between the first user management interface and the primary control network card and communicate data between the primary control network card and the at least one service board (Li Fig 2 and 3 teaches para 38-41 - the main control baseboard 31 includes a switch chip 311, a main control program module 312, and a plurality of physical network ports, i.e., a first physical network port 313, a second physical network port 314, a third physical network port 315, and a fourth physical network ports 316. The switch chip 311 is connected to the main control program module 312, and the first physical network port 313, the second physical network port 314, the third physical network port 315 and the fourth physical network port 316 are connected to the switch chip 311. The switch chip 311 is in signal connection with a management network 35 through the first physical network port 313, to realize information interaction with the management network 35).
Although Li teaches blocking the communication between the management network and the main control program module (Li Fig 3), Li does not specifically teach however Young teaches, prevent data from being forwarded to the first user management interface in a first state (Young para 67 where network switch architecture with device management modules with different connection states at management interface teaches the claimed limitation).
Li teaches server baseboard with main control program module connected to switch chip and baseboard with n, n+1 devices (abstract, Fig 1 and 3). Li does not teach however Young teaches, the first primary control port is configured to prevent data from the at least one service board from being forwarded to the first user management interface in a first state (Li Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Li-Young before him or her, to combine Li’s server baseboard architecture as described above with Young’s teaching of prevent data based on first state of devices. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enhance secure device management in centralized management architecture (Young para 4).
Li-Young do not teach however Ogawa teaches,
where in the first state refers to a normal operation stage of the frame-type device (Ogawa Fig 4 para 154-155 teaches Operation state with ethernet frame device which covers claimed function. Examiner interpretes operation state as first state and frame – type device similar to reference’s ethernet frame device).
Li-Young-Ogawa are analogous as they are from same domain of data transfer in network.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Li-Young-Ogawa before him or her, to combine Li-Young’s server baseboard architecture as described above with to prevent data based on first state of devices with Ogawa’s first state in frame-type device (Ogawa Fig 4). The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enhance secure data transfer in optical control unit with physical line information (Ogawa para 5).
As per claim 2 combination of Li-Young-Ogawa teaches, the frame-type device according to claim 1, wherein the first primary control port is configured by an access control list (ACL) to prevent data from the at least one service board from being forwarded to the first user management interface in the first state (Li Fig 2, para 33 teaches where user configures the switch chip by using Access Control List (ACL) rules to block the communication between port 0 and port n, thereby blocking the communication between the management network and the main control program module, which covers the claimed limitation).
As per claim 3 combination of Li-Young-Ogawa teaches, the frame-type device according to claim 1, wherein the primary control switch chip is configured by a forward list to communicate data between the first user management interface and the primary control network card and communicate data between the primary control network card and the at least one service board (Li Fig 4, para 54-55 teaches step 402, the management control instruction is forwarded to switch chip based on the access object identifier with management network sends the management control instruction to the switch chip in the main control baseboard through a physical network port, which covers the claimed limitation).
As per claim 4 combination of Li-Young-Ogawa teaches, the frame-type device according to claim 1, wherein the at least one service board comprises a plurality of service boards, and the primary control switch chip is configured not to communicate data between any two service boards of the plurality of service boards (Li Fig 5 element 501, para 59-60 teaches where step 501, the switch chip is configured to block the communication between the management network and the main control program module with switch chip is configured by using ACL rules to block the communication between port 0 and port n, thereby blocking the communication between the management network and the main control program module).
As per claim 6 combination of Li-Young-Ogawa teaches, the frame-type device according to claim 1, wherein the primary control switch chip is configured not to communicate data between the first user management interface and the at least one service board in the first state (Li Fig 5 para 59-60 teaches in step 501, the switch chip is configured to block the communication between the management network and the main control program module and switch chip is configured by using ACL rules to block the communication between port 0 and port n, thereby blocking the communication between the management network and the main control program module).
As per claim 7 combination of Li-Young-Ogawa teaches, the frame-type device according to claim 1, wherein the primary control switch chip is configured to communicate data between the first user management interface and the at least one service board in a second state (Li Fig 3 para 39-40 teaches main control program module 312 is connected to a service network 34 through the second physical network port 314, to realize information interaction with the service network 34.).
Claim 14,
Claim 14 is rejected in accordance with claim 1.
Claim 15,
Claim 15 is rejected in accordance with claim 2.
Claim 16,
Claim 16 is rejected in accordance with claim 3.
Claims 17,
Claim 17 is rejected in accordance with claim 4.
As per claim 18 combination of Li-Young-Ogawa teaches, the control board according to claim 14, wherein the frame-type device comprises an additional control board, and wherein the control switch chip further comprises a fourth control port for connecting with the additional control board, and the control switch chip is further configured to communicate data between the control board and the additional control board (Li Fig 3 para 39-41 teaches main control baseboard 31 includes a switch chip 311, a main control program module 312, and a plurality of physical network ports, i.e., a first physical network port 313, a second physical network port 314, a third physical network port 315, and a fourth physical network ports 316, where the fourth physical network port 316 are connected to the switch chip 311. Alongwith main control program module 312 is connected to a service network 34 through the second physical network port 314, to realize information interaction with the service network 34).
Claim 19,
Claim 19 is rejected in accordance with claim 12.
Claim 20,
Claim 20 is rejected in accordance with claim 13.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ogawa et al US Publication 20200153655
Suizo et al US Patent 10313254
Funahara et al US Patent 12264457
Min et al US Patent 11943639
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 VIRAL S LAKHIA whose telephone number is (571)270-3363. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 am - 6 pm.
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, Lynn Feild can be reached on 571-272-2092. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned 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). 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.
/VIRAL S LAKHIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Prosecution Insights