, DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-7 and 21-30 are pending in the Instant Application.
Claims 1-7 and 21-30 are rejected (Non-Final Rejection).
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12 September 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-6, 21-26 and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Rahman et al. (“Rahman”), United States Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0046366.
As per claim 1, Rahman discloses a method performed at an entity of a service supporting service capabilities through a set of Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) ([0203] wherein RESTful API is used), the method comprising:
determining a ranking profile, wherein the ranking profile comprises information that specifies, for at least one resource hosted at the entity ([0075] and [0113]-[0116] wherein a ranking profile is determined, which consist of a resource (sensor in the prior art), at least one type of event that may affect a ranking associated with the at least one resource ([0113]-[0116] wherein an event may be the placement of the sensor in the first ranking position twice in a row), and at least one rank value associated with the at least one type of event, wherein the at least one rank value is used to adjust, by an amount equal to the at least one rank value, a ranking for the at least one resource when the at least one type of event occurs ([0116] wherein the rank value is +1 as described, wherein if sensor 1 is placed in the first position twice in a row, the system will move the sensor +1 in the ranking), and wherein the at least one resource hosted at the entity comprises data stored at the entity ([0019] wherein the URI is stored in a ranked database at the entity);
receiving an indication of the occurrence of the at least one type of event, wherein the at least one type of event comprises an operation associated with the data of the at least one resource stored at the entity ([0116] wherein it is determined that at least one type of event occurs (sensor 1 is rank 0, and sensor 2 is rank 1 twice); and
adjusting, at the entity based on the occurrence of the at least one type of event, by an amount equal to the at least one rank value associated with the at least one type of event, a ranking of the at least one resource hosted at the entity ([0116] wherein the after the first two searches where sensor 1 is ranked “0”,sensor 1 will be ranked “1” (a change of the rank value “+1”), wherein the ranking is stored at the entity ([0018] wherein the ranking is stored at the entity).
As per claim 2. Rahman discloses the method of claim 1, wherein adjusting the ranking of the at least one resource hosted at the entity comprises at least one of: determining, based on the at least one rank value, to increase the ranking of the at least one resource by an amount equal to the at least one rank value; or determining, based on the at least one rank value, to decrease the ranking of the at least one resource by an amount equal to the at least one rank value (EXAMINER NOTES the use of “at least one of” and [0116] wherein the rank is decreased if it is repeated placed in the first ranking place, since 0 is the first rank).
As per claim 3, Rahman discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one type of ranking event comprises at least one of: a resource discovery selection event; a create, retrieve, or delete operation associated with the at least one resource; an update to a number of subscriptions or notification targets for the at least one resource; a determination that the at least one resource has been announced; or a response to a group fan-out operation of the at least one resource (Examiner notes the user of “at least one of” in this claim, where only one option must be recited to disclose the claim and [0115] wherein a retrieve request operation is described, which makes the event ranked lower to prevent overload)
As per claim 4, Rahman discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising generating a list of a plurality of resources hosted at the entity based on a determined ranking associated with each of the plurality of resources ([0074] wherein a ranked list of URIs is described).
As per claim 5, Rahman discloses the method of claim 4, wherein generating the list of the plurality of resources comprises weighting a first type of event different than a second type of event ([0087]-[0088] wherein the eights of types of events can be different like the weight of the load balancing performed in claim 1 may receive a certain weight, while a “sleeping’ event may have a different weight).
As per claim 6, Rahman discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising creating a resource ranking preference profile that indicates one or more preferences for ranking a resource hosted at the entity ([0088] wherein a ranking preference profile can consist of weighing load balancing higher or lower based on the size and usage of the network).
As per claim 21, Rahman discloses an apparatus comprising one or more processors ([0078]) and memory ([0078]) storing computer-executable instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, implement an entity of service supporting service capabilities through a set of Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) and cause the entity to perform the method of claim 1. As a result, claim 21 is rejected for the same rationale and reasoning as claim 1.
As per claim 22, claim 22 is the apparatus the performs the method of claim 2 and is rejected for the same rationale and reasoning.
As per claim 23, claim 23 is the apparatus the performs the method of claim 3 and is rejected for the same rationale and reasoning.
As per claim 24, claim 24 is the apparatus the performs the method of claim 4 and is rejected for the same rationale and reasoning.
As per claim 25, claim 25 is the apparatus the performs the method of claim 5 and is rejected for the same rationale and reasoning.
As per claim 26, claim 26 is the apparatus the performs the method of claim 6 and is rejected for the same rationale and reasoning.
As per claim 28, Rahman discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the service is provided as a middleware service for IoT services ([0159] and [0191] wherein the service is provided as a software middleware supporting IoT services on an IoT service layer) .
As per claim 29, Rahman discloses the method of claim 28, wherein the middleware service is a service layer located on top of network protocol stacks ([0191] wherein the middleware service located on top of underlying networking interface (network protocol stacks)) .
As per claim 30, Rahman discloses the method of claim 29, wherein the service layer is defined according to ETSI/oneM2M standards ([0191]).
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 7 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahman, in view of Stern et al. (“Stern”), United States Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0113548 .
As per claim 7, Rahman discloses the method of claim 1, but does not disclose sending, to a remote entity, an indication that the ranking of the at least one resource has been updated at the entity, wherein the remote entity is configured to update a ranking of the at least one resource at the remote entity. However, Stern teaches sending, to a remote entity, an indication that the ranking of the at least one resource has been updated at the entity ([0147] and [0304] wherein an indication that a resource has grown in popularity (updated) at a local service layer entity (another domain in the prior art) is popular, changes the popular ranking in the remote service layer (the subscriber domain in the prior art), wherein the remote entity is configured to update a ranking of the at least one resource at the remote entity ([0305] wherein the remote service layer (subscriber domain in the prior art) can increase the ranking profile of the resource by increasing popularity as described in [0147] and storing the resource locally).
Both Rahman and Stern rank resources. Rahman could share the ranking as in Stern with the ranking profiles to teach the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the method of updating the ranking of resources as in Rahman with the sharing of the ranking information as in Stern in order to use more data to better rank resources in the network.
As per claim 27, claim 27 is the apparatus the performs the method of claim 7 and is rejected for the same rationale and reasoning.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 19 August 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states in REMARKS, page 6, that “Rahman does not teach such “rank values.”” While the Rahman reference was used previously with the event being “sleep,” which was more of a filter in examples, than a “value,” after further consideration it does appear that for the event described above (repeated ranking of a sensor at the highest ranking) does include a “rank value” by decreasing the rank by 1 as shown above.
While Examiner notes and appreciates the Applicant clarifying the language, there is still no guidance as to how the “ranking profile” is stored and shared. Applicant is encouraged to clarify the language “determining a ranking profile.” For instance, the description of the Ranking Profile in [00228] of the specification of the Instant Application describes a set of attributes, “…(e)ach attribute contains rank value pairs for successful and unsuccessful cases to increment or decrement, respectively, the rank of a resource that is being managed by the Hosting CSE.” Such language would overcome ethe prior art on record and further prosecution. If questions remain, please contact the Examiner for an interview.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KANNAN SHANMUGASUNDARAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7763. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM -6:00 PM.
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, Charles Rones can be reached at (571) 272-4085. 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.
/KANNAN SHANMUGASUNDARAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2168