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 § 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.
Claims 2, 7, 10, 15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims recite “a channel”, but multiple channels have already been claimed in their respective independent claims. It is therefore unclear to the examiner whether “a channel” refers to the previously claimed “multiple channels”, or an entirely separate channel altogether. For purposes of expedited prosecution, the examiner interprets “a channel” to mean “a channel of the multiple channels”.
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 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,010 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are merely a broadened version of the Patent, and are thus anticipated by the Patent. A mapping of claim 1 of the instant application to claim 1 of the Patent is shown below:
Instant Application
US Patent No. 12,219,010 B2
1. A computer implemented method performed by one or more processing resources of a first storage node or a second storage node of a distributed storage system, the computer implemented method comprising:
1. A computer implemented method performed by one or more processing resources of a first storage node or a second storage node of a distributed cloud storage system, the computer implemented method comprising:
distributing data traffic from multiple channels across different receive queues of the second storage node; and
providing multiple channels between the first storage node and the second storage node with each channel having a separate network connection for data of a transport layer session; in a transport layer, attaching the multiple channels to different transport sessions; distributing data traffic from the multiple channels across different receive queues and associated processing resources of the second storage node to reduce processing time and improve performance; and
monitoring whether two or more channels of the multiple channels share a same receive queue of the second storage node.
continuously monitoring, with the transport layer, whether two or more channels of the multiple channels share a same receive queue of the second storage node.
Similarly, claim 2 of the instant application is anticipated by claims 1 and 2 of the Patent, claim 3 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 3 of the Patent, claim 4 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 4 of the Patent, claim 5 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 5 of the Patent, claim 6 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 6 of the Patent, claim 7 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 7 of the Patent, claim 8 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 8 of the Patent, claim 9 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 9 of the Patent, claim 10 of the instant application is anticipated by claims 9 and 10 of the Patent, claim 11 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 11 of the Patent, claim 12 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 12 of the Patent, claim 13 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 13 of the Patent, claim 14 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 14 of the Patent, claim 15 of the instant application is anticipated by claims 14 and 15 of the Patent, claim 16 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 16 of the Patent, claim 17 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 17 of the Patent, claim 18 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 18 of the Patent, claim 19 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 19 of the Patent, and claim 20 of the instant application is anticipated by claim 20 of the Patent.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Pub. No. US 2020/0036636 A1 – generally teaches a network interface card that stores a hash value mapped to 5 tuples (source/destination IP addresses, source/destination ports, and transport layer protocol), the network interface card further comprising a plurality of receive queues. A receive queue for a corresponding inbound data message is determined using a hash value computed from the packet header values extracted from the message.
Pub. No. US 2016/0105377 A1 – generally teaches changing hash values for flow information, where the flow information includes transmission source/destination IP addresses, transmission source/destination port numbers, and a protocol number. The change is triggered by use rates of a transmission port exceeding a given value.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN A BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7168. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9AM - 530PM.
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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at (571) 272-3889. 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.
/JONATHAN A BUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights