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 responsive to application filed February 22nd, 2025.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 were presented, and are pending examination.
Drawings
Drawings filed on 2/22/2025 are acknowledged.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3, 8, 9, 11, 16, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35. U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Shenbagam et al. (US 20220124022 A1) in view of Hwang (US 20220337615 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shenbagam teaches a method for upgrading switches, comprising:causing to initiate a deny new service mode (Fig. 4, Step 2. ¶[0017], Ln. 17-32, and ¶[0023], Ln. 1-12, which teaches when the control service is notified a switch updating, it will then initiate configuration to reroute packets away from the updating switch); migrating an endpoint networked to the first switch to be networked to a second switch (Fig. 2, Elem: 202, ¶[0017], Ln. 12-16, which teaches that due to the update, the control service is communicating to be updated switch divert their current traffic to an alternative path to a new switch);and in response to the endpoint being networked to the second switch, performing an upgrade on the first switch (Fig. 2, Elem: 203, 204, Fig. 4, Step 4, Step 5, ¶[0018], Ln. 1-6, and ¶[0024], Ln. 7-16, which teaches the control server monitoring the traffic and determining that traffic has been divert and can initiate the update on the switch).Shenbagam fails to explicitly teach the incorporation of a first server and a second server instead of switches.However, Hwang is in the same field of invention and teaches where a first server is sending out a request to a session manager for the first server to be updated. (See in Hwang, Fig. 2, Elem: 215, 202, ¶[0043], Ln. 1-11, which teaches the first server sending a failover message to the proxy server and requesting the first server be updated). Hwang discloses a master server (first server) sending a failover mention to the proxy server (session manager). The failover mention alerts the proxy server what information and action to take, including redirection rules, and the proxy server then routes client requests to go to server A’ (second server) during the update of the master server, (See in Hwang, Fig. 2, Elem: 215, 202, ¶[0043], Ln. 1-11, which teaches the first server sending a failover message to the proxy server and requesting to be updated). It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shenbagam’s method to monitor and update servers instead of switches. In doing so, it would make transmitting data and maintenance of a system less disruptive to a user interacting with the system whenever the systems need to be interrupted for upgrades.
Regarding claim 3, Shenbagam teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, upon completion of the upgrade on the first switch, migrating the endpoint networked to the second switch to be networked to the first switch. (Fig. 3, Elem: 301-303, ¶[0020]-[0021], which teaches monitoring the first switch to determine if the switch can rejoin the network, once information is updated, the switch can begin to receive packets again).
Shenbagam fails to the incorporation of a first server and a second server instead of switches.
(See in Hwang, Fig. 2, Elem: 215, 202, ¶[0043], Ln. 1-11, which teaches the first server sending a failover message to the proxy server and requesting to be updated). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Shenbagam based on the teachings of Hwang in accordance to the rationale given for claim 1.
Regarding claim 8 teaches the method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first switch or the second switch comprises a communication manager server. (¶[0012], Ln. 7-13, which teaches functions surrounding service and communication management). Shenbagam fails to teach the incorporation of a first server and a second server instead of switches.
However, Hwang is in the same field of invention and teaches servers sending out a request to be updated to the server. (See in Hwang, Fig. 2, Elem: 215, 202, ¶[0043], Ln. 1-11, which teaches the first server sending a failover message to the proxy server and requesting to be updated). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Shenbagam based on the teachings of Hwang in accordance to the rationale given for claim 1.
Claims 9, 11, 16-17, and 19 are a different statutory category of, and are slight variations of the rejected claims, 1, 3, and 8 above. Therefore claims 11, 16-17, and 19 are rejected based on the same rationale as given for claims 1, 3, and 8.
Claims 2, 4, 10, 12, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35. U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Shenbagam et al. (US 20220124022 A1) in view of Hwang (US 20220337615 A1) and in further view of Park et al. (US 20060126648 A1) and in further view of Varghis et al. (US 8630163 B1).
Regarding claim 2, Shenbagam teaches the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the endpoint networked to the first switch to be networked to the second switch comprises (Fig. 2, Elem: 202, ¶[0017], Ln. 12-16, which teaches that due to the update, the control service is communicating to be updated switch divert their current traffic to an alternative path to a new switch); Shenbagam teaches generating a message comprising an identifier of the second server; (¶[0017], which teaches generating and sending an AS-path notification advertisement (the claimed message) that indicates to use switch 150 (second server) instead of switch 151 (first server))and sending the message to a session manager (¶[0017], which teach switches 140-142 (session manager) receiving the AS-path notification advertisement (the claimed message)); and wherein the session manager processes the message (¶[0017], which teach switches 140-142 (session manager), as a result of receiving the AS-path notification message (the claimed message), directing packets through switch 150 (second server) instead of switch 151 (first server));and in response to receiving a call, generates a message and sends the message to cause the second server to connect. (¶[0017], which teach switches 140-142 (session manager), as a result of receiving the AS-path notification message (the claimed message), directing packets through switch 150 (second server) instead of switch 151 (first server));
Park is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of transferring sessions and calls across devices. (See in Park, ¶[0064], which teaches the procedure for transferring sessions connected through devices through the session management server).
Park teaches the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the endpoint networked to the first server to be networked to the second server comprises:
generating a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) PUBLISH message comprising (see Park ¶[0066], Ln. 1-3, which teaches the first device (the claimed first server) making a SIP Publish message):
an identifier of the endpoint (see Park ¶[0065], which teaches the session data included in the SIP Publish message including an address of two peers of the session, a session ID of the session, a cookie, and other session specific information),
and an identifier of the second server (see Park ¶[0065], which teaches the session data included in the SIP Publish message including an address of two peers of the session, a session ID of the session, a cookie, and other session specific information);
and sending the SIP PUBLISH message to a session manager (see Park ¶[0066] Ln. 3-9, which teaches where the SIP PUBLISH message is then sent to the session management server (claimed session manager));
and wherein the session manager processes the SIP PUBLISH message (see Park ¶[0066] Ln. 9-12, which teaches where the session management server receives the SIP PUBLISH message, extracts the session data set and user identification, and stores the data),
and in response to receiving a call for the endpoint, generates a SIP INVITE message for the endpoint (see Park ¶[0068], which teaches the session management server (claimed session manager) generating a SIP NOTIFY message (claimed SIP INVITE message) for the second server (claimed endpoint))
and sends the SIP INVITE message to cause the second server to connect to the endpoint (see Park ¶[0069], which teaches the second device (claimed endpoint) receiving the SIP NOTIFY (claimed SIP INVITE message) and transfers the session establishment request message to the service device (claimed second server)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include SIP Protocol messages to help the ease of access between transferring sessions through devices.
Shenbagam, Hwang, and Park fail to explicitly teach a message comprising an action set to "ReHome.”
However, Varghis teaches an endpoint rehoming where the endpoint A registers with Server B (claimed first server), the Server B receives request from Server A (claimed second claimed server), Server A then joins the cluster, and sends a re-homing readiness event towards Server B indicating to rehome endpoint ‘A.’ (See in Varghis, Col. 8, Ln. 13-44). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to include a “rehoming” procedure to keep the process of transferring endpoints easier and more uniformed.
Regarding claim 4, Shenbagam teaches the method of claim 3, wherein migrating the endpoint networked to the second switch to be networked to the first switch comprises (Fig. 3, Elem: 301-303, ¶[0020]-[0021], which teaches monitoring the first switch to determine if the first switch can rejoin the network, once information is updated, the first switch can begin to receive packets again); Shenbagam teaches generating a message comprising an identifier of the first server; (¶[0021], which teaches generating and sending an AS-path notification advertisement (the claimed message) that switch 151 (second server) is now available)and sending the message to a session manager (¶[0021], which teach switches 140-142 (session manager) receiving the AS-path notification advertisement (the claimed message)); and wherein the session manager processes the message (¶[0021], which teach switches 140-142 (session manager), as a result of receiving the AS-path notification message (the claimed message), directing packets through switch 150 (second server) instead of switch 151 (first server));and in response to receiving a call, generates a message and sends the message to cause the first server to connect. (¶[0021], which teach switches 140-142 (session manager), as a result of receiving the AS-path notification message (the claimed message), directing packets through switch 150 (second server) instead of switch 151 (first server));
Park is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of transferring sessions and calls across devices. (See in Park, ¶[0064], which teaches the procedure for transferring sessions connected through devices through the session management server).
Park teaches the method of claim 3, wherein migrating the endpoint networked to the second server to be networked to the first server comprises:
generating a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) PUBLISH message comprising (see Park ¶[0066], Ln. 1-3, which teaches the first device (the claimed second server) making a SIP Publish message):
an identifier of the endpoint (see Park ¶[0065], which teaches the session data included in the SIP Publish message including an address of two peers of the session, a session ID of the session, a cookie, and other session specific information),
and an identifier of the first server (see Park ¶[0065], which teaches the session data included in the SIP Publish message including an address of two peers of the session, a session ID of the session, a cookie, and other session specific information);
and sending the SIP PUBLISH message to a session manager (see Park ¶[0066] Ln. 3-9, which teaches where the SIP PUBLISH message is then sent to the session management server (claimed session manager));
and wherein the session manager processes the SIP PUBLISH message (see Park ¶[0066] Ln. 9-12, which teaches where the session management server receives the SIP PUBLISH message, extracts the session data set and user identification, and stores the data),
and in response to receiving a call for the endpoint, generates a SIP INVITE message for the endpoint (see Park ¶[0068], which teaches the session management server (claimed session manager) generating a SIP NOTIFY message (claimed SIP INVITE message) for the second server (claimed endpoint))
and sends the SIP INVITE message to cause the first server to connect to the endpoint (see Park ¶[0069], which teaches the second device (claimed endpoint) receiving the SIP NOTIFY (claimed SIP INVITE message) and transfers the session establishment request message to the service device (claimed first server)).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Shenbagam and Hwang based on the teachings of Park in accordance to the rationale given for claim 2.Shenbagam, Hwang, and Park fail to explicitly teach a message comprising an action set to "ReHome.”
However, Varghis teaches an endpoint rehoming where the endpoint A registers with Server B (claimed second server), the Server B receives request from Server A (claimed first server), Server A then joins the cluster, and sends a re-homing readiness event towards Server B indicating to rehome endpoint ‘A.’ (See in Varghis, Col. 8, Ln. 13-44). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Shenbagam, Hwang, and Park based on the teachings of Varghis in accordance to the rationale given for claim 2.
Claims 10, 12, 18, and 20 are a different statutory category of, and are slight variations of the rejected claims 2 and 4 above. Therefore claims 10, 12, 18, and 20 are rejected based on the same rationale as given for claims 2 and 4.
Claims 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35. U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Shenbagam et al. (US 20220124022 A1) in view of Hwang (US 20220337615 A1) and in further view of Boizard et al. (US 20120250497 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Shenbagam teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
generating a message and sending the message to the first switch in response to the message (¶[0014], Ln. 3-10, which teaches where the control service communicates with the switches surrounding updates), receiving a message from the first switch (¶[0017], Ln. 1-8, which teaches where the switch receiving a message from the first switch); and in response to the message, causing a session manager to reroute new calls for the endpoint to the second switch (Fig. 4, Step 1, Step 2. ¶[0017], Ln. 17-32, and ¶[0023], Ln. 1-12, which teaches when the control service is notified a switch updating, it will then initiate configuration to reroute packets away from the updating switch);
However, Shenbagam fails to teach the incorporation of a first server and a second server instead of switches
Hwang is in the same field of invention and teaches servers sending out a request to be updated to the server. (See in Hwang, Fig. 2, Elem: 215, 202, ¶[0043], Ln. 1-11, which teaches the first server sending a failover message to the proxy server and requesting to be updated).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Shenbagam based on the teachings of Hwang in accordance to the rationale given for claim 1.
Shenbagam or Hwang do not explicitly teach the method of claim 1 including SIP OPTION and SIP 503 UNAVAILABLE messages.
However, Boizard teaches the sending and receiving a call request that can include a SIP OPTION (See in Boizard, ¶[0120], that the SIP requests sent between the nodes can be an OPTIONs dialogue), and that when there is a failure between node communication, it will give a temporarily unavailable or a 503 Service Unavailable message, (See in Boizard, ¶[0127]-[0128] that SIP 503 UNAVAILABLE messages is sent when an obstruction, i.e, when the next node is unusable).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shenbagam’s invention to include a SIP 503 SERVICE UNAVAILABLE response after an attempt to communicate a call and receiving no response. In doing so, it would alert where to send the call instead of being held up during server maintenance.
Regarding claim 6, Shenbagam or Hwang do not explicitly teach wherein generating the SIP OPTIONS message and sending the SIP OPTIONS message is performed while at least one call is ongoing and comprising a customer communication device, an agent communication device and therebetween the first server.
However, Boizard teaches SIP Call request is sent by a caller, passing through four nodes to a receiving device, which can be agent communication device. (See in Boizard, ¶[0011], ¶[0120], which teaches nodes communicating between a customer caller and a destination device and that the SIP requests sent between the nodes can be an OPTIONs dialogue). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Shenbagam and Hwang based on the teachings of Boizard in accordance to the rationale given for claim 5.
Regarding claim 7, Shenbagam or Hwang do not explicitly teach the method of claim 5, further comprising: receiving a second call addressed to an agent communication device; and in response to the SIP OPTIONS message, routing the second call to the agent communication device via the second server.
However, Boizard teaches where the SIP Call request is sent by a caller, passing through four nodes to a receiving device, which can be agent communication device. (See in Boizard, ¶[0011] and ¶[0120], which teach calls being sent through nodes between a customer caller and a destination device and that the SIP requests sent between the nodes can be an OPTIONs dialogue) One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Shenbagam and Hwang based on the teachings of Boizard in accordance to the rationale given for claim 5.
Claims 13, 14, and 15 are a different statutory category of, and are slight variations of the rejected claims 5, 6, and 7 above. Therefore claims 13, 14, and 15 are rejected based on the same rationale as given for claims 2 and 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CELINE AYLIN IMANI whose telephone number is (571)270-0247. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm.
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, Ario Etienne can be reached at 571-272-4001. 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.
/CELINE AYLIN IMANI/Examiner, Art Unit 2457 06/04/2026
/RAMY M OSMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Prosecution Insights