DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 have been examined and are rejected.
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
Claims 1, 3, 6-8, 10, 13, 14-15, 17-18 and 20 objected to because of the following informalities: claims 1, 8 and 15 recite the abbreviations: “ARP”, “IP”, “MAC”, “VLAN IDs” and “VLAN ID”. Claims 3, 6-7, 10, 13-14, 17-18 and 20 recite the abbreviation “DHCP”. Any abbreviation or shortened representations of a term should be spelled out completely upon its first use in each claim branch (e.g., user equipment (UE)). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because claims 15-20 are directed towards transitory propagating signals. Claims 15-20 recites “computer-readable storage medium”. A broad but reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and also transitory propagating signals in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media. When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. A claim drawn to such a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by adding the limitation “non-transitory” to the claim (e.g. “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium”).
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 15-20 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 15 recites “the computer program may be executed by a processor”. The phrase “may be” renders the claims indefinite. The phrase “may be” merely indicates possibility or uncertainty. Therefore, it is unclear whether the computer program is executed by the processor. Claim 15 should be amended to recite “…the computer program, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to:…” to overcome the rejection. Claims 16-20 fail to remedy the deficiency of claim 15 and are rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7-8, 10-11, 14-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saunderson et al. (U.S. PGPub 2006/0248229).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15, Saunderson teaches A method configured for network management, comprising: obtaining an ARP table and a MAC table in a network environment, (Saunderson, see figs. 2-4; see paragraph 0028-0029 The DHCP server 2 maintains a table that contains the IP addresses, IP Interface (effectively the subnet or VLAN that the device is connected to) and MAC address of devices on the network...; see paragraph 0039 includes an ARP table 12T of information about each device (rather than the user). Thus the table 12T includes a list of MAC addresses, corresponding IP addresses for the relevant device,...; see paragraphs 0013-0014 a dynamic table within said switch of, for each edge device, the MAC address, the IP address, the VLAN to which the edge device is to be connected, and the port which it is connected…; see paragraph 0040 a dynamic table 14T of information about the edge devices and users connected to the switch 14. The table 14T includes a list of MAC addresses for the relevant edge devices, and for cach device the port to which it is connected, its IP address, its user name, the VLAN to which it is to be connected and the QoS to which it is entitled; see paragraph 0053 A user interface to the switch 14 allows the client information learnt from the DHCP packets (table 14T) to be made available to the administrator to allow network diagnostics...)
wherein the ARP table stores a mapping relationship between IP addresses and MAC addresses, and (Saunderson, see figs. 2-4; see paragraph 0039 includes an ARP table 12T of information about each device (rather than the user). Thus the table 12T includes a list of MAC addresses, corresponding IP addresses for the relevant device,...; see paragraph 0028-0029 The DHCP server 2 maintains a table that contains the IP addresses, IP Interface (effectively the subnet or VLAN that the device is connected to) and MAC address of devices on the network.)
the MAC table stores a mapping relationship between VLAN IDs, MAC addresses, and switch ports; (Saunderson, see figs. 2-4; see paragraphs 0013-0014 a dynamic table within said switch of, for each edge device, the MAC address, the IP address, the VLAN to which the edge device is to be connected, and the port which it is connected…; see paragraph 0040 a dynamic table 14T of information about the edge devices and users connected to the switch 14. The table 14T includes a list of MAC addresses for the relevant edge devices, and for cach device the port to which it is connected, its IP address, its user name, the VLAN to which it is to be connected and the QoS to which it is entitled)
determining a mapping relationship among IP addresses, VLAN IDs, MAC addresses, and switch ports based on the ARP table and the MAC table; and (Saunderson, see figs. 2-4; see paragraphs 0013-0014 a dynamic table within said switch of, for each edge device, the MAC address, the IP address, the VLAN to which the edge device is to be connected, and the port which it is connected…; see paragraph 0040 a dynamic table 14T of information about the edge devices and users connected to the switch 14. The table 14T includes a list of MAC addresses for the relevant edge devices, and for cach device the port to which it is connected, its IP address, its user name, the VLAN to which it is to be connected and the QoS to which it is entitled; see paragraph 0039 includes an ARP table 12T of information about each device (rather than the user). Thus the table 12T includes a list of MAC addresses, corresponding IP addresses for the relevant device,...; see paragraphs 0094-0099 Does IP source address match the IP address assigned to this MAC in Table 14T...Perform Gratuitous ARP Action)
when the network environment changes, disabling a target switch port, or assigning an isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port, wherein the target switch port is a switch port where a change occurs, or a switch port corresponding to a changed IP address or MAC address. (Saunderson, see figs. 2-4; see paragraph 0072 learned Voice VLAN is deleted if the lease time associated with the DHCP client allocation expires or the feature is disabled on the port or if the VLAN is deleted from the switch...; see paragraphs 0071-0072 When auto voice VLAN learning is configured on the port 5 of switch 14 attached to PC3 and IP phone 17, the learned Voice VLAN is applied to the switch port as a tagged member only if the VLAN has been administratively configured on the switch and has been administratively configured to an uplink port to allow the voice traffic to flow into the core of the network...; Examiner notes that claim 1 is a method claim, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. Regarding claim 1, this limitation is treated as the condition is not being met and therefore, the limitation is not required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim)
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 17, Saunderson teaches when the network environment changes, disabling a target switch port, or assigning an isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port comprising: when detecting a change of the network environment comprises: changing of the IP addresses, changing of the MAC addresses, changing of the switch ports, changing of an expiration of a DHCP lease, changing of an unauthorized DHCP service, and changing of a MAC address not listed in the MAC table, disabling the target switch port, or assigning the isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port. (Saunderson, see figs. 2-4; see paragraph 0072 The learned Voice VLAN is deleted if the lease time associated with the DHCP client allocation expires or the feature is disabled on the port...be allocated an IP address, and be assigned the voice VLAN, on the default port VLAN after which it will release the original IP address and then allocate a new IP address on the voice VLAN...; see paragraphs 0101-0109; Examiner notes that claim 3 is a method claim, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. Regarding claim 3, this limitation is treated as the condition is not being met and therefore, the limitation is not required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim)
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18, Saunderson teaches wherein the unauthorized DHCP service comprising: an IP address assigned to an unauthorized access device by a rogue DHCP server. (Saunderson, see figs. 2-4; see paragraphs 0101-0109 Is IP Destination Address known (in table 14T14T)? If NO (unauthorized) go to Step 130)…; see paragraph 0031 unauthorised network attached devices to be connected in the network with a fixed IP address that conflicts with a DHCP allocated address...; see paragraph 0127)
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Saunderson teaches wherein obtaining an ARP table and a MAC table in a network environment comprising: requesting the ARP table from a DHCP server; and (Saunderson, see figs. 1-4 see paragraph 0028-0029 The DHCP server 2 maintains a table that contains the IP addresses, IP Interface (effectively the subnet or VLAN that the device is connected to) and MAC address of devices on the network. The IP addresses are assigned such that in any one network each client (device) is allocated a unique IP address from the allowed range of administrator configured IP addresses for each subnet. When the DHCP client and the DHCP server devices are on the same network the DHCP client (such as DHCP Client B) packets are broadcast to the DHCP server. When the DHCP client and DHCP server devices are on different IP subnets...MAC address stored in the table ...makes a request of the DHCP server; see paragraph 0036 The DHCP server 15 includes a list of MAC address or MAC address OUI's configured by the administrator associated with the IP phone network. When one of these devices requests an IP address from the DHCP server...)
requesting the MAC table from a switch. (Saunderson, see figs. 2-4; see abstract a dynamic table within said switch of, for each edge device…; see paragraph 0010 a dynamic table within said switch of, for each edge device, the MAC address, the IP address, and the port which it is connected; see also paragraph 0040 Switch 14 includes a memory 14M to contain a dynamic table 14T of information about the edge devices and users connected to the switch 14. The table 14T includes a list of MAC addresses for the relevant edge devices, and for cach device the port to which it is connected, its IP address, its user name, the VLAN to which it is to be connected and the QoS to which it is entitled...; see paragraph 0053 A user interface to the switch 14 allows the client information learnt from the DHCP packets (table 14T) to be made available to the administrator to allow network diagnostics...)
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.
Claims 2, 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saunderson in view of V et al. (U.S. PGPub 2025/0055787).
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 16, Saunderson teaches all of the features of claims 1, 8 and 15. However, Saunderson does not explicitly teach when the network environment changes, disabling a target switch port, or assigning an isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port comprising: when a VLAN ID of the network environment corresponding to the target switch port is greater than or equal to a threshold, disabling the target switch port; and when the VLAN ID of the network environment corresponding to the target switch port is less than the threshold, assigning the isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port.
V teaches when the network environment changes, disabling a target switch port, or assigning an isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port comprising: when a VLAN ID of the network environment corresponding to the target switch port is greater than or equal to a threshold, disabling the target switch port; and when the VLAN ID of the network environment corresponding to the target switch port is less than the threshold, assigning the isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port. (V, see paragraph 0048 where detections of network loops on the sender port 112-1 (for a given VLAN) exceeds the threshold, the loop protect engine 116 disables (at 218) the reenable timer 120. Disabling the reenable timer 120 can refer to not starting the reenable timer 120 in response to disabling the sender port (at 208)...; see paragraph 0064 the loop protect engine 116 would disable the given port for VLAN Y since the quantity of detected network loops (3) for VLAN Y exceeds the threshold...; Examiner notes that claim 2 is a method claim, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. Regarding claim 2, this limitation is treated as the condition is not being met and therefore, the limitation is not required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Saunderson and V to provide the technique of when the network environment changes, disabling a target switch port, or assigning an isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port comprising: when a VLAN ID of the network environment corresponding to the target switch port is greater than or equal to a threshold, disabling the target switch port; and when the VLAN ID of the network environment corresponding to the target switch port is less than the threshold, assigning the isolated VLAN ID to the target switch port of V in the system of Saunderson in order to reduce burden on a network (V, see paragraph 0011).
Claims 5-6, 12-13 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saunderson in view of Oba et al. (U.S. PGPub 2010/0115083).
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 19, Saunderson teaches all of the features of claims 1, 8 and 15. However, Saunderson does not explicitly teach further comprising: when the network environment changes, issuing a network change prompt, wherein the network change prompt is configured to prompt at least one reason for a change in the network environment.
Oba teaches further comprising: when the network environment changes, issuing a network change prompt, wherein the network change prompt is configured to prompt at least one reason for a change in the network environment. (Oba, see fig. 3; see paragraph 0032 if an interface is disabled, all links associated with the interface will be removed. Another example is when the connected link for an interface is changed from one link to another. This causes an "IP address change" event for the interface...; see paragraph 0182 "IP address change" notification for an interface...; Examiner notes that claim 5 is a method claim, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. Regarding claim 5, this limitation is treated as the condition is not being met and therefore, the limitation is not required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Saunderson and Oba to provide the technique of when the network environment changes, issuing a network change prompt, wherein the network change prompt is configured to prompt at least one reason for a change in the network environment of Oba in the system of Saunderson in order to avoid loss of service and customer satisfaction (Oba, see paragraph 0006).
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 20, Saunderson-Oba teaches wherein the at least one reason comprising: changing of the IP addresses, changing of the MAC addresses, changing of the switch ports, changing of an expiration of a DHCP lease, changing of an unauthorized DHCP service, and changing of a MAC address not listed in the MAC table. (Oba, see fig. 3; see paragraph 0032 if an interface is disabled, all links associated with the interface will be removed. Another example is when the connected link for an interface is changed from one link to another. This causes an "IP address change" event for the interface...; see paragraph 0182 "IP address change" notification for an interface...) The motivation regarding to the obviousness to claims 5, 12 and 19 is also applied to claims 6, 13 and 20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. This includes:
U.S. PGPub 2018/0287938, which describes a method for processing network packets using unique identifiers associated with source and destination virtual machines (VMs);
U.S. PGPub 2012/0131097, which describes techniques for providing an isolation virtual local area network (VLAN) for layer two access networks; and
U.S. PGPub 2009/0172151, which describes methods of preventing duplication of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses of gateways in a network.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MENG VANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7023. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-2PM, 3PM-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, NICHOLAS 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.
/MENG VANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
