Ex Parte Watanabe et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardDec 27, 201310973211 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 27, 2013) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 10/973,211 10/26/2004 Yukihiro Watanabe 1799 7590 12/27/2013 Patrick G. Burns, Esq. GREER, BURNS & CRAIN, LTD. Suite 2500 300 South Wacker Dr. Chicago, IL 60606 EXAMINER PAPPAS, PETER ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2444 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 12/27/2013 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte YUKIHIRO WATANABE, KEIICHI OGURO, KUNIAKI SHIMADA and KEN YOKOYAMA ___________ Appeal 2011-006537 Application 10/973,211 Technology Center 2400 ____________ Before ST. JOHN COURTENAY III, THU A. DANG and CARL W. WHITEHEAD, JR., Administrative Patent Judges. WHITEHEAD, JR., Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal 2011-006537 Application 10/973,211 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants are appealing claims 4, 16, 17, 21, 24 and 25. Appeal Brief 4. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2012). We affirm. Introduction The invention is directed a topology discover apparatus where “the topology among a plurality of devices in a communication network with a communication function having a hierarchical structure composed of a plurality of layers, while linking the topology of a lower-order layer with that of a higher-order layer is discovered.” Specification 5. Illustrative Claim (Emphasis Added) 4. A topology discover apparatus for discovering topology among a plurality of devices composing a communication network, comprising: a storage device for storing device setting information of the plurality of devices; and a generation device for extracting information about a media access control learning table of a switch included in the plurality of devices as the information about the media access control address from the device setting information, obtaining a port in which the most media access control addresses in the media access control learning tables of all switches are registered, and when a plurality of media access control addresses registered in the obtained port coincides with a combination of media access control addresses registered in a plurality of ports in a media access control learning Appeal 2011-006537 Application 10/973,211 3 table of a first switch different from a second switch with the obtained port and a combination of media access control addresses registered in a plurality of ports other than the obtained port in a media access control learning table of the second switch coincides with a plurality of media access control addresses registered in a port in the media access control learning table of the first switch, registering a pair of the obtained port of the second switch and the port of the first switch in the storage device as information of a physical connection. Rejection on Appeal Claims 4, 16, 17, 21, 24 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Breitbart (Yuri Breitbart et al., Topology Discovery in Heterogeneous IP Networks; IEEE INFOCOM 2000) and Mizutani (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2004/0076154 A1; published April 22, 2004). Answer 3-5. Issue Do Breitbart and Mizutani, either alone or in combination, disclose or would have suggested “obtaining a port in which the most media access control addresses in the media access control learning tables of all switches are registered” as recited in claim 4? ANALYSIS Appellants argue that Mizutani fails to address Breitbart’s deficiency because Mizutani does not disclose “obtaining a port in which the most media access control addresses in the media access control learning tables of Appeal 2011-006537 Application 10/973,211 4 all switches are registered.” Appeal Brief 11. Appellants argue that Mizutani is directed to “address information defined in a network layer.” Id. at 12. Therefore in light of Mizutani’s direction, Appellants contend: In contrast, the present invention relates to a data link layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that “media access control addresses” are not associated with a network layer, but instead with the data link layer. The two layers are separate from each other, and are at different levels in a computer networking model, such as the OSI model. Hence, the Examiner’s position that “the most appropriated output port” of Mizutani et al. discloses or suggests the claimed “port in which the most media access control addresses in the media access control learning tables of all switches are registered” is erroneous. Since Mizutani does not disclose or suggest “obtaining a port in which the most media access control addresses in the media access control learning tables of all switches are registered,” a combination of Breitbart et al. and Mizutani et al. still would not disclose or suggest this feature. Appeal Brief 12. The Examiner explains that, “Breitbart's teachings relating to gathering data link layer address data, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to apply Mizutani's teachings of gather[ing] a most appropriated port in order to discover the topology faster” Answer 6. The Examiner finds that, “One of ordinary creativity would realize that Mizutani's teachings of discovering a most appropriated port in the network layer apply equivalently to the data link layer.” Id. The Examiner concludes that Mizutani’s teachings are applicable regardless of protocol layer. Id. Appeal 2011-006537 Application 10/973,211 5 We agree with the Examiner’s findings because although Mizutani technology is directed to a network layer it does not prevent one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that Mizutani’s teaching is equally applicable to a data link layer. The technology employed by the two types of layers is not mutually exclusive from one another, often using the very same electrical components and circuitry architecture to perform their functions. Further, the addresses disclosed in both Breitbart [page 6] and Mizutani [0004-6] merely identify nodes in their respective networks. Consequently, while we agree with Appellants that Mizutani does not disclose “media access control addresses” (Appeal Brief 12) nonetheless Breitbart discloses the “media access control addresses” aspect of the claimed invention (Answer 3-4); it is Mizutani’s teachings of, “On the routing table, one output port determined as the most appropriated output port is registered as an output port corresponding to one destination address” (Mizutani [0006]) that is relied upon to modify Breitbart wherein determining the most appropriate “output port” is not protocol dependent. See Answer 4. Therefore we sustain the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of claims 4, 16, 17, 21, 24 and 25 for the reasons stated above. DECISION The Examiner’s obviousness rejection of claims 4, 16, 17, 21, 24 and 25 is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv). See 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(f). Appeal 2011-006537 Application 10/973,211 6 AFFIRMED ELD Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation