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 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) 1-20 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DelRegno et al., 20060153070 A1 (hereafter referred to as DelRegno) in view of Nalluri et al., USPN 10833961 B1 (hereafter referred to as Nalluri), further in view of Gray et al., US 20080189353 A1 (hereafter referred to as Gray).
A. Claim 8, DelRelgno teaches a system comprising:
a memory coupled to at least one processor, the at least one processor (p. 43; “In a preferred embodiment, however, the functions are performed by a processor such as a computer, server, or an electronic data processor in accordance with code such as computer program code, software, and/or integrated circuits that are coded to perform such functions, unless indicated otherwise….”) configured to:
receive a user request for a service facilitated by a telecommunications network (p. 75; “An order entry process 410 is used to communicate a customer's request for new services, for example, establishing a physical link from a CPE 216 to the service edge 214, a change in bandwidth of a provisioned flow within a link, adding of new flows, or other service upgrades.”);
identify, based on the service, a port (the identified device has an input port and output port, ) to which the user connects to access the telecommunications network (p. 15; “Typically, the customer's devices comprise a router coupled to devices such as other routers, hubs, workstations, personal computers, or the like. The customer's devices are collectively referred to as customer premise equipment (CPE) 216 as illustrated in Figure 2.”);
send, based on the port, queries to retrieve information from one or more additional devices in the telecommunications network (p. 36; “Notably, it is preferred that the control system 228 is configured to provide operations personnel the ability to query the status of remote devices as will be explained in greater detail below.” And p. 65 ; “A centralized database containing complete up to date global network topology information is not required, as current network connectivity is determined, at least in part, by one or more individual network elements.” See also p. 59, “The control system 228 is also communicatively coupled to a control database 232 to provide storage for and access to network topology and status information.”);
retrieve, based on the queries, the information from the one or more additional devices (p. 65 ; “A centralized database containing complete up to date global network topology information is not required, as current network connectivity is determined, at least in part, by one or more individual network elements.” See also p. 59, “The control system 228 is also communicatively coupled to a control database 232 to provide storage for and access to network topology and status information.”);
identify, based on the information, a second device to which the port may connect to generate a path to an endpoint of the telecommunications network (p. 89; “Access device 220, for example, looks at its local connectivity topology and responds back to the management plane 701 and/or control plane 710 with information regarding the connections that are available, the bandwidth available on a given connection, and the bandwidth that needs to be allocated in order to comply with the service request.);
generate, based on the port and the second device, a path from the location of the user to the endpoint in the telecommunications network (p. 89; “The management and control planes 701 and 710 may receive information from multiple network elements. Based on the information received from the network element(s), the control plane 710 determines the flow path or paths.” “Based on the information received from the network element(s), the control plane 710 determines the flow path or paths. Note that there may be different paths capable of complying with the service request.”); and
provision the service for the user based on the path without presenting a quote to the user indicating an amount of time expected to provision the service (p. 68; “The method and system of the present invention, however, provides an in-band communications flow that is available at the time the communications link to the access network is established. Furthermore, little or no additional equipment need be installed at the customer premises simply to provide control and maintenance functionality.” ON DEMAND meaning to assess yes or no it can be done.). DelRegno does not specifically teach the user request identifying location of a user. However, in the same field of endeavor, Nalluri teaches the user request identifying a location of a user (column 3, lines 46-55; “The request may include a service identifier that identifies a type of service that is being requested, a user identifier that identifies an agent submitting the request and/or an entity identifier that identifies the entity associated with the agent that is submitting the request, device information for a set of endpoint devices that are hosted by the set of client sites 106 and that are to send and/or receive traffic associated with the service, location information for the set of client sites 106 that support the set of endpoint devices, service preferences information of the entity, and/or the like.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Delregno by incorporating location information with the user request for the user request in DelRegno improve effectiveness for the assessment of whether to provision a path. The motivation would have been to improve service metrics by establishing network elements closer to the path.
DelRegno-Nalluri does not specifically teach using discovery commands. However, in the same field of endeavor, Gray teaches send discovery commands to retrieve information from one or more additional devices in the telecommunications network and retrieve, based on the discovery commands, the information from the one or more additional devices (p. 43, “INE 170 may use SNMP to query a node, such as a router. The queried node provides information enabling INE 170 to infer the existence of the IPSec tunnel(s).” And p. 44, “NMS 175 includes a root INE (not shown) that receives information from lower level INEs, such as INE 170. NMS 175 may store the received information in a manner that is structured as network objects and arranged to model network 1000, as described in greater detail below with respect to FIG. 9.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify DelRegno-Nalluri by incorporating discovery commands from Gray to improve network management by enabling management decisions based on the an enhanced visibility into the network based on available device information.
Claim 1 is a method comprising steps similar to the functions of the system of claim 8 above. Claim 1 is rejected on a similar rationale.
Claim 15 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, that when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to execute steps similar to the functions of claim 8 above. Claim 20 is rejected on the same rationale.
B. Claim 9, Delregno-Nalluri-Gray teaches the system of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: update, after the provisioning, inventory for the telecommunications network to indicate that the user is using the path for the service (Gray, p. 65, “INE 170 may then store, as network objects, the determined nodes, interfaces, and topology information (step 720); and then based on the stored network object information, infer any network objects, such as a routed path and/or a tunnel (step 725)…” Updated after resolving conflicts.).
Claim 2 is a method comprising steps similar to the functions of the system of claim 9 above. Claim 2 is rejected on a similar rationale.
Claim 16 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, that when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to execute steps similar to the functions of claim 9 above. Claim 16 is rejected on the same rationale.
C. Claim 10, Delregno-Nalluri-Gray teaches the system of claim 8, wherein to generate the path occurs without information in inventory for the telecommunications network indicating which devices and ports are used for respective users and services (DelRegno, p. 83; “The control system processes the request within layer 2 provisioning system 430, which may access network topology information contained within database 232. The layer 2 provisioning system now determines all of the individual commands that need to be issued to the various network elements in order to configure the service.” “The various network addresses and labels are assigned to the customer to determine the exact path of the communication flows out to the service edge. In step 605, for example, the switch 226 is provided with the layer two switch specific information.”).
Claim 3 is a method comprising steps similar to the functions of the system of claim 10 above. Claim 3 is rejected on a similar rationale.
Claim 20 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, that when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to execute steps similar to the functions of claim 10 above. Claim 20 is rejected on the same rationale.
D. Claim 11, DelRegno-Nalluri-Gray teaches the system of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: identify at least one of a virtual local area network, a subinterface, or a route target based on the information, wherein the path uses the at least one of the virtual local area network, the subinterface, or the route target (DelRegno, p. 89, “The management and control planes 701 and 710 may receive information from multiple network elements. Based on the information received from the network element(s), the control plane 710 determines the flow path or paths. Note that there may be different paths capable of complying with the service request.”).
Claim 4 is a method comprising steps similar to the functions of the system of claim 11 above. Claim 4 is rejected on a similar rationale.
Claim 18 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, that when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to execute steps similar to the functions of claim 11 above. Claim 18 is rejected on the same rationale.
E. Claim 12, Delregno-Nalluri-Gray teaches the system of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to:
identify a first command protocol used by the second device; and identify a second command protocol used by a third device of the telecommunications network, wherein the discovery commands comprise a first command using the first command protocol and a second command using a second command protocol (Gray, p. 56, “INE 170 may receive information concerning each of nodes A-F 150, 450-454 based on a routing protocol (step 505), receive information concerning each of nodes A-F based on an active protocol (step 510), and continue to receive such information until the network reaches a quiescent state (step 512). If a quiescent state is not reached, INE 170 continues to receive such information (yes at step 512).”).
Claim 5 is a method comprising steps similar to the functions of the system of claim 12 above. Claim 5 is rejected on a similar rationale.
Claim 19 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, that when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to execute steps similar to the functions of claim 12 above. Claim 19 is rejected on the same rationale.
F. Claim 13, DelRegno-Nalluri-Gray, teaches the system of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to:
send an indication to the user that the service has been provisioned for the user (Nalluri, column 13, lines 40-43; “The configuration and deployment subsystem may provide the layer 2 subsystem with a PVC provisioning response to indicate that the provisioning has been completed.”).
Claim 6 is a method comprising steps similar to the functions of the system of claim 13 above. Claim 13 is rejected on a similar rationale.
G. Claim 14, DelRegno-Nalluri- Gray teaches the system of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to:
determine that using the path for the service and the user conflicts with inventory for the telecommunications network (Gray, Interpreting “using the path for the service and the user) to be determining services in Gray. See p. 56, “INE 170 may resolve conflicting information received in steps 505 and 510 (step 520), discover network objects (step 525) based on the received information…” And p. 61, “To resolve conflicting information received in steps 505 and 510, INE 170 may simply include a rule to resolve any conflicts (step 520). For example, INE 170 may disregard any SNMP information gathered in step 510 from a node, if the information conflicts with information received based on a routing protocol, such as RIP.”); and
update the inventory to reconcile the conflict (Gray, p. 87, “NMS 175 may receive network information including one or more of the following information: discovered and inferred network objects, event, topology, and any inferred service(s), all of which have been described above (step 16050). NMS 175 may initially store the received information (steps 16100) in database 350. The initial stored information represents the "baseline" of network 4000 at any given time. In one embodiment, subsequent to the baseline, NMS 175 stores network information at predetermined intervals, e.g., once every 2 minutes or once per day.”).
Claim 7 is a method comprising steps similar to the functions of the system of claim 14 above. Claim 7 is rejected on a similar rationale.
Claim 20 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, that when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to execute steps similar to the functions of claim 14 above. Claim 20 is rejected on the same rationale.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 25, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues – “Conversely, the amended claims recite the identification of a port to which the user connects to access the telecommunications network and sending discovery commands based on that part.”
DelRegno teaches, in p. 24. “In accordance with one embodiment of the present invention, an access device having a first port, a second port, and a processing unit is provided. The first port is configured to communicate to a network node via a first communications link, and the second port is configured to communicate with a demarcation device.” See p. 72, “Typically, network elements, such as the access device, are manufactured in racks. Each rack has one or more shelves, and each shelf is capable of holding one or more cards. Cards also frequently have multiple ports. The combination of the shelf identifier, card identifier and port identifier provides one way for the control system to uniquely identify a specific port.” Therefore, DelRegno teaches the network element having ports that are identified.
Applicant argues – “the Applicant respectfully submits that Nalluri and Gray fail to remedy the deficiencies of DelRegno as Nalluri and Gray each fail to disclose or suggest ‘identifying, based on the service, a port to which the user connects to access the telecommunications network’ and ‘sending, based on the port, discovery commands to retrieve information from one or more additional devices in the telecommunications network,’ as recited in the present claims.”
DelRegno teaches that inherently the network elements have specific ports by which communication with the network element may be identified. See DelRegno p. 72, “Typically, network elements, such as the access device, are manufactured in racks. Each rack has one or more shelves, and each shelf is capable of holding one or more cards. Cards also frequently have multiple ports. The combination of the shelf identifier, card identifier and port identifier provides one way for the control system to uniquely identify a specific port.” Therefore, DelRegno teaches the network element having ports that are identified.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Roper, US 20140313931 A1, teaches a computer implemented method of identifying an egress port of a focus device connected in a computer network, the method being implemented at a monitor computer connected to the network and comprising: generating a query message to the focus device, the query message including an address identifying the device and a query key formulated based on a destination identifier, and including an instruction readable at the device to return the result message including identification of an egress port for messages addressed to the destination identified in the destination identifier when the query message is received at the device; receiving a result message at the monitor computer; reading the result message, and where the result message does not identify an egress port autonomously generating at least one subsequent query message; including at least one of (i) a different address for a different device connected in the computer network, and (ii) a different query key, selected by the monitor computer, wherein sufficient query messages are generated to identify the egress port of the focus device.
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 PATRICE L WINDER whose telephone number is (571)272-3935. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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, KAMAL B DIVECHA can be reached at (571)272-5863. 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.
/Patrice L Winder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights