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 .
Status of Claims
This action is responsive to the application filed on January 24, 2025. Claims 1-20 were presented, and are pending examination.
Drawings
The drawings filed on January 24, 2025 are accepted.
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 5-7, 13, 4, and 18 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.
Claim 5 is unclear. Firstly, it is not clear whether the implicit ACK include the first offset and second offset both. Secondly, the first offset indicates the position of the previously received data packet which is larger than the second offset that indicates the position of the retransmitted packet. It appears the original transmission of the retransmitted packet precedes the transmission of the previously received packet since the first offset is larger than the second offset. In other word, The claim should clarify the order of the transmissions to mitigate the ambiguity in relationship between the first offset and second offset.
Dependent claims 6 and 7 inherit similar ambiguity.
Claim 13 exhibits similar deficiency.
Dependent claim 14 inherit similar ambiguity.
Claim 18 exhibits similar deficiency.
Examiner’s Note about the Format of 35 U.S.C. 102/103 Rejections
Generally, limitations of a claim are reproduced identically and followed by examiner’s explanation with citation from prior art in Italic enclosed by a parenthesis, (), for each limitation. In examiner’s explanation, the mapping of the key elements of a limitation to the disclosed elements of prior art is shown by stating the disclosed element immediately followed by the claimed element inside a parenthesis. Specific quotation from prior art is delineated with quotation mark, ““. If primary art fails to teach a limitation or part of the limitation, the limitation or the part of the limitation is placed inside double square brackets, [[ ]], for better understandability, and appropriate secondary art(s) is/are applied later addressing the deficiency of the primary art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-3, 8-11, 15-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burstein et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20220158772 A1), hereinafter, Burstein, in view Ash et al. (US PBPUB No. US 20150261453 A1), hereinafter, Ash, and further in view of Wang et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20140050105 A1), hereinafter, Wang.
Regarding claim 1:
Burstein teaches:
A method comprising:
receiving, by a receiver node, a plurality of data packets from a sender node, wherein a given data packet of the plurality of data packets includes a portion of data of a transaction payload being [[mirrored to the receiver node]], wherein the sender node buffers within a transmit data structure those of the plurality of data packets for which receipt by the receiver node has yet to be acknowledged, and [[wherein the sender node and the receiver node provide access to storage via a cloud environment]] (Fig. 1 shows receiving, by a host 24 (receiver node), plurality of RDMA packets from a host 22 (sender node) as stated in paragraph 0027 “In the example shown in FIG. 1, NIC 32 of computer 22 sends a sequence of data packets 36 over network 28 to NIC 32 of computer 24 in an RDMA data transfer transaction”. Fig. 2 shows a buffer 48 (transmit data structure) for buffering the RDMA packets).
Burstein does not explicitly teach mirrored to the receiver node, wherein the sender node and the receiver node provide access to storage via a cloud environment.
Ash teaches mirrored to the receiver node, wherein the sender node and the receiver node provide access to storage via a cloud environment (paragraph 0015 discloses primary storage system and secondary storage system with data mirroring in distributed storage environment ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Burstein to incorporate the teaching of Ash about data mirroring between nodes in storage environment. One would be motivated to do that for efficient disaster recovery (see paragraph 0015 of Ash).
Burstein does not teach facilitating, by the receiver node, freeing of space within the transmit data structure by acknowledging receipt of a data packet retransmitted by the sender node to the receiver node prior to the receiver node processing the retransmitted data packet.
Wang teaches teach facilitating, by the receiver node, freeing of space within the transmit data structure by acknowledging receipt of a data packet retransmitted by the sender node to the receiver node prior to the receiver node processing the retransmitted data packet (Fig. 7, step 740, discloses retransmission of a DTU i.e. a packet. Steps 750 and 760 discloses receiving ACK from the receiving node. Step 770 disclose freeing the queue by removing the packet for which the ACK is received from the receiver).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Burstein to incorporate the teaching of Wang about keeping the packet until ACK is received. One would be motivated to do that to ensure successful retransmission in case of failure (see paragraph 0033 of Wang as stated “If an ACK is received by the reference model 200 corresponding to the additional transmission of the DTU, the ACK indicates that the DTU was received by a CPE without error, in which case the DTU may be removed from the retransmission queue 238. Otherwise, the DTU may remain in the retransmission queue until an ACK is received, or until its storing period is reached. Furthermore, retransmission may be enabled in upstream and/or downstream directions.”).
As to claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Burstein in view of Ash and Wang teach all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Burstein does not teach wherein said acknowledging receipt comprises transmitting an acknowledgement (ACK) to the sender node in a form of an explicit ACK in which the ACK includes an offset value indicating a position of a portion of data carried by the retransmitted data packet within the transaction payload.
Wang teaches wherein said acknowledging receipt comprises transmitting an acknowledgement (ACK) to the sender node in a form of an explicit ACK in which the ACK includes an offset value indicating a position of a portion of data carried by the retransmitted data packet within the transaction payload (paragraph 0063 discloses receiving ACK for retransmission as stated “In step 740, the DTU, which has previously been transmitted NRD time, may be transmitted an additional time (i.e., retransmitted). In step 750, the transmitting apparatus may receive an additional response corresponding to the additional transmission. In block 760, the method 700 may determine whether the additional response contains an ACK message.” . Paragraph 0062 discloses ACK includes sequence ID of the packet indicating position of the packet as stated “Each response may comprise the SID of the DTU, and either an ACK or a NACK message.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Burstein to incorporate the teaching of Wang about receiving ACK with sequence number. One would be motivated to do that to free up the buffer after successful retransmission (see paragraph 0033 of Wang as stated “If an ACK is received by the reference model 200 corresponding to the additional transmission of the DTU, the ACK indicates that the DTU was received by a CPE without error, in which case the DTU may be removed from the retransmission queue 238.”).
As to claim 3, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Burstein in view of Ash and Wang teach all the limitations of claim 2 as shown above.
Burstein further teaches wherein the ACK comprises a standalone ACK packet (paragraph 0040 discloses sending dedicated ACK).
As to claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Burstein in view of Ash and Wang teach all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Burstein further teaches further comprising, prior to transmission of the retransmitted data packet by the sender node to the receiver node: identifying, by the receiver node, the retransmitted data packet as a missing data packet relating to the transaction payload; and transmitting, by the receiver node, a message to the sender node containing information indicative of an offset value corresponding to a position of a portion of missing data within the transaction payload (paragraph 0034 discloses the receiver node identifies the missing packet based on the sequence number and sends NAK with the sequence number of missing packet for retransmission.).
As to claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Burstein in view of Ash and Wang teach all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Burstein further teaches wherein the data packet retransmitted by the sender node to the receiver node is as a result of immediate resend processing performed by the sender node (paragraph 0035 discloses retransmission of lost packet immediately after receiving NAK).
Regarding claim 10:
Burstein teaches:
A distributed storage system comprising: one or more processing resources; and instructions that when executed by the one or more processing resources cause the distributed storage system to:
receive, by a remote direct memory access (RDMA) layer of a receiver node of the distributed storage system, a plurality of data packets from a sender node of the distributed storage system, wherein a given data packet of the plurality of data packets includes a portion of data of a transaction payload being [[mirrored to the receiver node]] and an offset value indicating a position of the portion of data within the transaction payload, wherein an RDMA layer of the sender node buffers within a transmit data structure those of the plurality of data packets for which receipt by the receiver node has yet to be acknowledged, and [[wherein the sender node and the receiver node provide access to storage via a cloud environment]] (Fig. 1 shows receiving, by a host 24 (receiver node), plurality of RDMA packets from a host 22 (sender node) as stated in paragraph 0027 “In the example shown in FIG. 1, NIC 32 of computer 22 sends a sequence of data packets 36 over network 28 to NIC 32 of computer 24 in an RDMA data transfer transaction”. Fig. 2 shows a buffer 48 (transmit data structure) for buffering the RDMA packets. As shown in Fig. 1, RDAM packets are ordered with sequence numbers and each sequency number indicates the position of the packet in the group of packets as explained in paragraph 0027 ).
Burstein does not explicitly teach mirrored to the receiver node, wherein the sender node and the receiver node provide access to storage via a cloud environment.
Ash teaches mirrored to the receiver node, wherein the sender node and the receiver node provide access to storage via a cloud environment (paragraph 0015 discloses primary storage system and secondary storage system with data mirroring in distributed storage environment ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Burstein to incorporate the teaching of Ash about data mirroring between nodes in storage environment. One would be motivated to do that for efficient disaster recovery (see paragraph 0015 of Ash).
Burstein does not teach facilitate, by the RDMA layer of the receiver node, freeing of space within the transmit data structure by acknowledging receipt of a data packet retransmitted by the RDMA layer of the sender node to the receiver node prior to the receiver node processing the retransmitted data packet.
Wang teaches teach facilitate, by the RDMA layer of the receiver node, freeing of space within the transmit data structure by acknowledging receipt of a data packet retransmitted by the RDMA layer of the sender node to the receiver node prior to the receiver node processing the retransmitted data packet (Fig. 7, step 740, discloses retransmission of a DTU i.e. a packet. Steps 750 and 760 discloses receiving ACK from the receiving node. Step 770 disclose freeing the queue by removing the packet for which the ACK is received from the receiver).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Burstein to incorporate the teaching of Wang about keeping the packet until ACK is received. One would be motivated to do that to ensure successful retransmission in case of failure (see paragraph 0033 of Wang as stated “If an ACK is received by the reference model 200 corresponding to the additional transmission of the DTU, the ACK indicates that the DTU was received by a CPE without error, in which case the DTU may be removed from the retransmission queue 238. Otherwise, the DTU may remain in the retransmission queue until an ACK is received, or until its storing period is reached. Furthermore, retransmission may be enabled in upstream and/or downstream directions.”).
Claim 11 recites limitations similar to claim 2. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 15 recites limitations similar to claim 8. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 16 recites limitations similar to claim 9. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 17:
Claim 17 recites limitations similar to claim 10. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 20 recites limitations similar to claim 15. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 4-7, 12-14, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burstein in view of Wang, further in view of Ash, and further in view of Saha.
As to claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. X teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Burstein does not teach wherein the ACK comprises a piggyback ACK in which the ACK is piggybacked within a heartbeat packet or a data packet.
Saha teaches wherein the ACK comprises a piggyback ACK in which the ACK is piggybacked within a heartbeat packet or a data packet (paragraph 0070 discloses piggybacking ACK on another message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Burstein to incorporate the teaching of Saha about piggybacking ACK on another message. One would be motivated to do that to reduce the amount of additional traffic attributable to the acknowledge messages (see paragraph 0018 of Saha).
As to claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. X teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Burstein teaches wherein said acknowledging receipt comprises transmitting an ACK to the sender node in a form of an [[implicit ACK]] in which the ACK includes a first offset value indicating a position of a portion of data carried by a previously received data packet of the plurality of data packets within the transaction payload that is greater than a second offset value indicating a position of a portion of data carried by the retransmitted data packet within the transaction payload (paragraph 0040 sending ACK as stated “NIC 34 of computer 26 arranges the received packet data in memory 42, and returns a positive ACK packet 76 over network 28 to computer 22. ACK packet 76 typically identifies the most recent packet in the sequence that was successfully received at computer 26. Thus, in the present example, ACK packet 76 acknowledges data packet.”. Paragraph 0044 discloses ACK includes the packet serial number. ).
Burstein does not teach implicit ACK.
Saha teaches implicit ACK (paragraph 0070 discloses implicit ACK).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Burstein to incorporate the teaching of Saha about implicit ACK on another message. One would be motivated to do that to reduce number of acknowledge messages (see paragraph 0018 of Saha).
As to claim 6, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated. X teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as shown above.
Burstein further teaches wherein the ACK comprises a standalone ACK packet (paragraph 0040 discloses sending dedicated ACK).
As to claim 7, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated. X teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as shown above.
Burstein does not teach wherein the ACK comprises a piggyback ACK in which the ACK is piggybacked within a heartbeat packet or a data packet.
Saha teaches wherein the ACK comprises a piggyback ACK in which the ACK is piggybacked within a heartbeat packet or a data packet (paragraph 0070 discloses piggybacking ACK on another message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Burstein to incorporate the teaching of Saha about piggybacking ACK on another message. One would be motivated to do that to reduce the amount of additional traffic attributable to the acknowledge messages (see paragraph 0018 of Saha).
Claim 12 recites limitations similar to claims 3 and 4. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 13 recites limitations similar to claim 5. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 14 recites limitations similar to claims 6 and 7. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 18 recites limitations similar to claims 11 and 13. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 19 recites limitations similar to claim 12. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMAL M HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3070. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-5:30 M-F.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571)272-3964. 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.
June 10, 2026
/KAMAL M HOSSAIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights