Prior art — US Patent 12452192

Prior Art Analysis for US Patent 12,452,192

Based on a review of patent citations for US 12,452,192, the following references are identified as relevant prior art. The analysis focuses on the potential for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102, which requires a single prior art reference to disclose every element of a claimed invention. The key inventive concept of patent '192 revolves around a control server that monitors access point servers, creates a performance-based ranked list, and provides this list to an endpoint device for optimized tunnel creation.

1. US Patent 9,237,492 B2 (Akamai Technologies)

Full Citation: US 9,237,492 B2, "System and method for selecting a name server," filed Dec 19, 2013; issued Jan 12, 2016. Assignee: Akamai Technologies, Inc.
Brief Description: This patent describes a system for optimizing Domain Name System (DNS) resolution. It involves clients measuring the performance of different name servers (e.g., by testing for latency or packet loss) and reporting this data back to a central "mapping" system. This central system aggregates the performance data and provides clients with a list of name servers that are likely to be optimal for their specific location or network conditions.
Potential Anticipation: This reference appears highly relevant and could potentially anticipate the independent claims of patent '192.
- Claims 1, 8, and 15: The Akamai '492 patent discloses the core elements of the '192 patent's claims. Akamai's "mapping system" is analogous to the "control server" in patent '192. Its "name servers" are analogous to the "access point servers." The process of clients testing name servers and reporting performance metrics (latency) mirrors the '192 patent's concept of monitoring performance. Most critically, Akamai's system provides clients with a list of optimal name servers based on this collected performance data, which is functionally equivalent to the "ranked list" central to the claims of patent '192. An argument for anticipation would state that selecting an "optimal" server from a provided list is the same as selecting the "best-performing" server from a ranked list.

2. US Patent 8,631,114 B1 (Google Inc.)

Full Citation: US 8,631,114 B1, "Server selection," filed Apr 22, 2011; issued Jan 14, 2014. Assignee: Google Inc.
Brief Description: This patent details a method for a client device to select a server from a plurality of servers. A "master server" provides the client with a list of available servers. The client then probes a subset of these servers to determine network metrics, such as round-trip time (RTT). Based on these measurements, the client selects the best server to connect to.
Potential Anticipation: This reference is relevant but may not fully anticipate the claims.
- Claims 1, 8, and 15: The Google '114 patent discloses a central server (master server) providing a list of servers to a client, and the client selecting the best one based on performance metrics (RTT). This meets several key limitations. However, a key distinction from patent '192 is where the performance analysis and ranking occur. In the '114 patent, the client device does the work of probing the servers and determining the best one after receiving a general list. In contrast, patent '192 claims a system where the control server pre-ranks the list based on its own monitoring and provides this ranked list to the endpoint. Therefore, this reference may be more relevant for an obviousness argument (under 35 U.S.C. § 103) rather than direct anticipation.

3. US Patent 9,912,636 B2 (Aryaka Networks, Inc.)

Full Citation: US 9,912,636 B2, "Dynamic path selection in a global network," filed Sep 15, 2017; issued Mar 6, 2018. Assignee: Aryaka Networks, Inc.
Brief Description: This patent describes a software-defined wide area network (SD-WAN) architecture. The system includes a central controller that monitors the health and performance of various network paths between points of presence (POPs). The controller gathers metrics like latency, jitter, and packet loss. Based on these real-time conditions, the controller dynamically selects the optimal path for data traffic between an enterprise's branch offices and its data centers or cloud applications.
Potential Anticipation: This reference presents a strong case for potential anticipation.
- Claims 1, 8, and 15: The Aryaka '636 patent's "central controller" is analogous to the "control server" of patent '192. The "POPs" are analogous to the "access point servers." The controller's function of monitoring path performance by collecting latency, jitter, and loss data directly corresponds to the monitoring and data gathering recited in claim 8. The controller's use of this data to "dynamically select the optimal path" implies a ranking or comparison of available options, which is the functional equivalent of creating the "ranked list" in patent '192 and providing it to the network devices (endpoints) for establishing connections. This system of central performance monitoring and dynamic, optimized path selection closely mirrors the invention claimed in US 12,452,192.