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 .
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claims 5 and 15 be found allowable, claims 6 and 16 respectively will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claims 6 and 16 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claims 5 and 15 respectively. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Double Patenting
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11716286. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of instant application are broader in scope compared to the patented application and may be derived from combinations of the claims of the patented application, as shown in the following table.
Below are the claims of the instant application and previously patented application.
Instant application
(18/951,094)
Patented application 17/976,784
(patent #11716286)
1. A method comprising: providing a first storage, the storage being configured to store a plurality of flow records; selecting a flow record from the plurality of flow records; identifying a set of parameters associated with the flow record; obtaining performance metrics associated with the set of parameters; performing a comparison between the performance metrics to the set of parameters; examining, at the first storge, records of gateways to identify congested gateways based on the comparison; and storing records associated with the congested gateways at a second storage.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the storage comprises an aggregated data storage, the data storage being configured to storage flow metrics.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of parameters comprises deep packet inspection (DPI) parameters.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein the DPI parameters comprise traffic type identifier and application identifiers.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the second storage comprises an analysis storage.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the second storage comprises an analysis storage.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the records of gateways include gateway queue depth and average processing time.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising categorizing the congested gateways based on geographic locations.
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising creating a record in a path-analysis storage.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising deploying cloud gateways based at least on the comparison.
11. A non-transitory machine readable medium storing a program, the program comprising sets of instructions for: providing a first storage, the storage being configured to store a plurality of flow records; selecting a flow record from the plurality of flow records; identifying a set of parameters associated with the flow record; obtaining performance metrics associated with the set of parameters; performing a comparison between the performance metrics to the set of parameters; examining, at the first storge, records of gateways to identify congested gateways based on the comparison; and storing records associated with the congested gateways at a second storage.
12. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 11, wherein the storage comprises an aggregated data storage, the data storage being configured to storage flow metrics.
13. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 11, wherein the set of parameters comprises deep packet inspection (DPI) parameters.
14. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 13, wherein the DPI parameters comprise traffic type identifier and application identifiers.
15. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 11, wherein the second storage comprises an analysis storage.
16. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 11, wherein the second storage comprises an analysis storage.
17. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 11, wherein the records of gateways include gateway queue depth and average processing time.
18. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 11, wherein the program further comprising sets of instructions for comprising categorizing the congested gateways based on geographic locations.
19. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 11, wherein the program further comprising sets of instructions for creating a record in a path-analysis storage.
20. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 11, wherein the program further comprising sets of instructions for deploying cloud gateways based at least on the comparison.
1. For an SD-WAN (software defined, wide area network) established by a plurality of edge nodes and a set of one or more cloud gateways, a method of performing deep packet inspection (DPI), the method comprising: at a particular edge node, using a local deep packet inspector to perform a first DPI operation on a set of packets of a first packet flow to generate a set of DPI parameters for the first packet flow; forwarding a copy of the set of packets to a remote deep packet inspector to perform a second DPI operation to generate a second set of DPI parameters; and receiving a result of the second DPI operation and when the generated first and second DPI parameters are different, generating a record regarding the difference.
2. The method of claim 1 further comprising using the generated record to improve the local deep packet inspector's operation.
3. The method of claim 2, wherein the local deep packet inspector is a third party inspector that is used by the particular edge node.
4. The method of claim 1 further comprising: when the generated record specifies a discrepancy between the first and second sets of generated DPI parameters, sending data regarding the discrepancy to a remote machine to aggregate with other data regarding other discrepancies in the DPI operations performed for other packet flows through the WAN.
The method of claim 1 further comprising: after first DPI operation, specifying the generated first set of DPI parameters as the set of DPI parameters associated with the first packet flow; and when the first and second DPI parameter sets are different, modifying the set of DPI parameters associated with the first packet flow based on the generated second set of DPI parameters.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein modifying the set of DPI parameters comprises storing the second set of DPI parameters as the set of DPI parameters associated with the first packet flow.
7. The method of claim 1 further comprising: based on the generated first set of DPI parameters, forwarding the packets of the first packet flow; and when the generated first and second sets of DPI parameters are different, modifying the forwarding of the packets of the first packet flow, said modifying comprising using the second set of DPI parameters to forward the packets of the first packet flow.
8. The method of claim 1 further comprising: delaying the forwarding of packets of the first flow to a destination of the flow while performing the first DPI operation and storing the delayed packets in a storage queue of the particular edge node, wherein the set of packets are packets stored in the storage queue; and after the completion of the first DPI operation, forwarding the set of packets and other packets of the first flow to the destination, and forwarding a copy of the set of packets to the remote deep packet inspector.
9. The method of claim 8 further comprising using at least one parameter in the generated first set of DPI parameters to select a path through the WAN to forward the packets of the first packet flow.
10. The method of claim 1 further comprising distributing at least a subset of the generated DPI parameters to other edge nodes from the particular edge node.
11. The method of claim 1 further comprising distributing at least a subset of the generated DPI parameters to at least one gateway from the particular edge node.
12. The method of claim 1, wherein each generated DPI parameter set comprises an identifier that identifies a type of traffic carried in payloads of the packets.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein each generated DPI parameter set comprises an identifier that identifies an application that is a source of the first packet flow.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein the particular edge node is an edge machine that operates at a location of an entity with a plurality of computers and connects the plurality of computers to the WAN.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein the local deep packet inspector operates on a first computing device along with the edge node machine, while the remote deep packet
inspector operates on a separate, second computing device.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein the first and second computing devices are computers.
17. The method of claim 15, wherein the first and second computing devices are appliances
18. The method of claim 15, wherein the first computing device is an appliance, and the second computing device is a computer on which the remote deep packet inspector executes.
19. The method of claim 14, wherein the location is a first physical location, and the local deep packet inspector operates at the first physical location, while the remote deep packet inspector operates a different second physical location that does not neighbor the first physical location.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to INTEKHAAB AALAM SIDDIQUEE whose telephone number is (571)272-0895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at 571-272-3927. 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.
/INTEKHAAB A SIDDIQUEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights