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 .
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claim language should be interpreted as “the first execution policy may ensure that the PRB utilization ratio remains unchanged…” (Emphasis added)
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Examiner notes that the specific claim language only recites “receiving… a first intent… wherein the first intent comprises first condition information and second condition information… the second condition information indicates a second condition of maintaining a physical resource block (PRB) utilization rate in a process executing the first extent.”
This is distinguishable from the Applicant’s interpretation as the claim only do not require that the second condition is, itself, maintained.
As such, the actual state of the processes is irrelevant to the claims, as the claims provide a terminological template, rather than a description of a system. Specifically, the claim describes “second condition information” as having a meaning of “a second condition of maintaining a physical resource block (PRB) utilization rate.”
But the claim does not limit a process to the second condition information.
Therefore, Salmela, [0042] describes the usage of thresholds related to key performance indicators, which Examiner interprets as a form of PRB utilization rate. And as such, the “threshold,” which describes a PRB utilization rate, is used to indicate the PRB utilization rate, i.e. “maintaining” that rate. (For example, if the “second condition information” comprised “10%,” this second condition information would then indicate maintaining a 10% PRB) This is consistent with the first condition information as the claim does not restrict performance to the start and end time or enforce usage of the start and end time, but rather simply provides it as an element of the first intent.
Examiner recommends greater clarity on the usage of the “condition information,” noting specifically as this is merely “information” rather than explicitly commands, instructions, or rules, the condition information will be considered broadly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
2. Claims 1, 14, 19-20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20210258217 A1) in view of Salmela et al. (US 20190387471 A1).
Claim 1 Chen teaches an intent execution method, wherein the method comprises:
receiving, by a network management system (NMS), a first intent from a business support system (BSS), (FIG. 3, ¶0008, receiving, RCS-MF module 300, i.e. a network management system, a management policy, i.e. a first intent, from a policy module 310, i.e. a business support system, wherein the policy module 310 generates the management policy that is then received by the RCS-MF module 300) wherein the first intent comprises condition information; (FIG. 3, ¶0050, wherein the management policy comprises a network condition)
executing, by the NMS, the first intent by performing a management operation on a network based on the network meeting the condition. (¶0061, executing, by execution logic module 340 of the RCS-CF300, the management operation based on the condition)
However, Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the condition information comprises first condition information and second condition information, the first condition information indicates a first condition of a start time and an end time for executing the first intent, and the second condition information indicates a second condition of a physical resource block (PRB) utilization rate in a process of executing the first intent.
From a related technology, Salmela teaches wherein condition information comprises first condition information and second condition information, the first condition information indicates a first condition of a start time and an end time for executing the first intent, (¶0041, wherein a condition of the management function, e.g. a power saving function, comprises a time period with a start point and an endpoint for execution) and the second condition information indicates a second condition of maintaining a physical resource block (PRB) utilization rate in a process of executing the first intent. (¶0041, wherein a threshold, or a condition, of the management function, e.g. a power saving function comprises a physical resource block (PRB) utilization rate)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intent execution method described in Chen to incorporate the well-known conditions explored in Salmela in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
Claim 14 is taught by Chen in view of Salmela as described for Claim 1.
Claim 19 is taught by Chen in view of Salmela as described for Claim 1.
Claim 20 is taught by Chen in view of Salmela as described for Claim 14.
Claim 23 Chen in view of Salmela teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the PRB utilization rate remains unchanged on the network when the NMS performs the management operation on the network. (Chen, ¶0061, detecting if a predetermined deployment condition is met, and deploying the instance if it is met)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen and Salmela further to incorporate the threshold value, i.e. the second condition information, of Salmela as one of the predetermined deployment conditions of Chen in order to ensure performance is limited to desired conditions.
3. Claims 2-4, 6, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20210258217 A1) in view of Salmela et al. (US 20190387471 A1) and in further view of Chandrasekhar et al. (US 20200403863 A1).
Claim 2 Chen in view of Salmela teaches Claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the executing, by the NMS, the first intent comprises:
starting, by the NMS, a first process based on the first condition, wherein the first process is used to monitor whether the network meets the first condition; and
executing, by the NMS, the first intent according to the first process.
From a related technology, Chandrasekhar teaches wherein the executing, by the NMS, the first intent comprises:
starting, by the NMS, a first process based on the first condition, (Chandrasekhar, FIG. 9, ¶0112, starting a process based on the first condition; ¶0114, wherein the process monitors configlets based on the intent-generated configurations, i.e. constraints; ¶0010, monitoring to ensure lack of conflict based on prerequisites) wherein the first process is used to monitor whether the network meets the first condition; (Examiner notes that “the first process is used to…” comprises an intended use statement and lacks patentable weight) and
executing, by the NMS, the first intent according to the first process. (Chandrasekhar, FIG. 2, ¶0058, executing intent data according to the process)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate the teachings of Chandrasekhar in order to more efficiently utilize network resources by incorporating process monitoring processes that may improve resource utilization.
Claim 3 Chen in view of Salmela teaches Claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the executing, by the NMS, the first intent comprises:
translating the first intent into a first execution policy, wherein the first execution policy is used to enable the NMS to perform the management operation on the network, and ensure the second condition in a process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network; and
in response to determining that the network meets the first condition, sending, by the NMS, the first execution policy to an element management system (EMS).
From a related technology, Chandrasekhar teaches translating the first intent into a first execution policy, (Chandrasekhar, FIG. 2, ¶0058, translating the intent into device specific, low level configuration instructions, i.e. an execution policy) wherein the first execution policy is used to enable the NMS to perform the management operation on the network, and ensure the second condition in a process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network; (Examiner notes that the first third execution policy “is used to enable the NMS… and [is used to] ensure the NMS to perform..” comprises an intended use statement and does not have patentable weight, the claim does not incorporate the EMS, and thus the EMS is outside the scope of claims) and
in response to determining that the network meets the first condition, sending, by the NMS, the first execution policy to an element management system (EMS). (Examiner interprets an “element management system” as being a sub-system of the network management system, i.e. it’s a portion of the network management system that handles elements of the network; Examiner therefore interprets Rose, FIG. 2, step 225 and 235, ¶0066 and ¶0067, as sending the policy to the EMS by execution of the determined policy)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate the teachings of Chandrasekhar in order to more efficiently utilize network resources by incorporating process monitoring processes that may improve resource utilization.
Claim 4 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 2, and further teaches wherein the executing, by the NMS, the first intent based on the first condition and the second condition comprises:
translating, by the NMS, the first intent into a second execution policy and a third execution policy, (Chandrasekhar, FIG. 2, ¶0058, translating the intent into device specific, low level configuration instructions, i.e. an execution policy; Examiner notes that as the claims do not distinguish between the second and third execution policies outside of intended use, which does not have patentable weight, the first execution policy can also be the second and third) wherein the second execution policy is used to enable the NMS to perform the management operation on the network, and the third execution policy is used to ensure the second condition in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network; (Examiner notes that the second and third execution policy “is used to enable the NMS” comprises an intended use statement and does not have patentable weight, the claim does not incorporate the EMS, and thus the EMS is outside the scope of the claims)
sending, by the NMS, the third execution policy to an element management system; and in response to determining that the network meets the first condition, sending, by the NMS, the second execution policy to the EMS. (Examiner interprets an “element management system” as being a sub-system of the network management system, i.e. it’s a portion of the network management system that handles elements of the network; Examiner therefore interprets Rose, FIG. 2, step 225 and 235, ¶0066 and ¶0067, as sending the policy to the EMS by execution of the determined policy)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate the teachings of Chandrasekhar in order to more efficiently utilize network resources by incorporating process monitoring processes that may improve resource utilization.
Claim 6 Chen in view of Salmela teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the executing, by the NMS, the first intent comprises:
translating, by the NMS, the first intent into a second execution policy, wherein the second execution policy is used to enable the NMS to perform the management operation on the network; and
sending, by the NMS, the second execution policy and the first condition information to an EMS.
From a related technology, Chandrasekhar teaches translating, by the NMS, the first intent into a second execution policy, (Chandrasekhar, FIG. 2, ¶0058, translating the intent into device specific, low level configuration instructions, i.e. an execution policy; Examiner notes that as the claims do not distinguish between the second execution policy outside of intended use, which does not have patentable weight, the first execution policy can also be the second) wherein the second execution policy is used to enable the NMS to perform the management operation on the network; (Examiner notes that the second and third execution policy “is used to enable the NMS” comprises an intended use and does not have patentable weight, the claim does not incorporate this NMS performance, so is outside the scope) and
sending, by the NMS, the second execution policy and the first condition information to an EMS. (Examiner interprets an “element management system” as being a sub-system of the network management system, i.e. it’s a portion of the network management system that handles elements of the network; Examiner therefore interprets Rose, FIG. 2, step 225 and 235, ¶0066 and ¶0067, as sending the policy and information to the EMS by execution of the determined policy)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate the teachings of Chandrasekhar in order to more efficiently utilize network resources by incorporating process monitoring processes that may improve resource utilization.
Claim 21 is taught by Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar as described for Claim 2.
Claim 22 is taught by Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar as described for Claim 3.
4. Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20210258217 A1) in view of Salmela et al. (US 20190387471 A1) and in further view of Rose et al. (US 20130060669 A1).
Claim 5 Chen in view of Salmela Claim 1, but does not explicitly teach in response to determining that the network does not meet the first condition, stopping, by the NMS, maintaining the first intent.
From a related technology, Rose teaches in response to determining that the network does not meet the first condition, stopping, by the NMS, maintaining the first intent. (Rose, FIG. 2, step 225, ¶0066, maintaining the business rule when a respective prerequisite is not met)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate stopping conditions as described in Rose in order to efficiently utilize network resources.
5. Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20210258217 A1) in view of Salmela et al. (US 20190387471 A1) and Chandrasekhar et al. (US 20200403863 A1) and in view of Rao et al. (US 20200264937).
Claim 8 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 2, but does not explicitly teach receiving, by the NMS, first intent cancellation request information from the communication service provider, wherein the first intent cancellation request information is used to request to stop executing the first intent; and
stopping, by the NMS, the first process based on the first intent cancellation request information.
From a related technology, Rao teaches receiving, by the NMS, first intent cancellation request information from the communication service provider, wherein the first intent cancellation request information is used to request to stop executing the first intent; (¶0042, receiving an intent wherein the intent is used to stop executing intents, such as establishing thresholds) and stopping, by the NMS, the first process based on the first intent cancellation request information. (¶0042, stopping processes based on the intent cancellation)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar to incorporate the teachings of Rao in order to implement control mechanisms to efficiently manage network resources.
Claim 9 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 4, but does not explicitly teach receiving, by the NMS, second intent cancellation request information from the communication service provider, wherein the second intent cancellation request information is used to request to stop executing the first intent;
stopping, by the NMS, the first process based on the second intent cancellation request information;
generating, by the NMS, an intent execution stop policy and an execution stop policy of the second condition based on the second intent cancellation request information, wherein the intent execution stop policy is used to indicate to stop executing the second execution policy, and the execution stop policy of the second condition is used to indicate to stop executing the third execution policy;
sending, by the NMS, the intent execution stop policy to the EMS; and
sending, by the NMS, the execution stop policy of the second condition to the EMS.
From a related technology, Rao teaches receiving, by the NMS, second intent cancellation request information from the communication service provider, wherein the second intent cancellation request information is used to request to stop executing the first intent; (¶0042, receiving an intent wherein the intent is used to stop executing intents, such as establishing thresholds)
stopping, by the NMS, the first process based on the second intent cancellation request information; (¶0042, stopping processes based on the intent cancellation)
generating, by the NMS, an intent execution stop policy and an execution stop policy of the second condition based on the second intent cancellation request information, (¶0042, wherein the implementation of thresholds comprises the generation of stop policies based on received threshold information) wherein the intent execution stop policy is used to indicate to stop executing the second execution policy, and the execution stop policy of the second condition is used to indicate to stop executing the third execution policy; (Examiner notes that “is used to…” comprises an intended use statement)
sending, by the NMS, the intent execution stop policy to the EMS; (Examiner notes that the EMS is interpreted as a sub-system of the NMS, and wherein sending the process is taught by the implementation of the policy by the appropriate subsystem) and
sending, by the NMS, the execution stop policy of the second condition to the EMS. (Examiner notes that the EMS is interpreted as a sub-system of the NMS, and wherein sending the process is taught by the implementation of the policy by the appropriate subsystem)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar to incorporate the teachings of Rao in order to implement control mechanisms to efficiently manage network resources.
6. Claims 10-13, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20210258217 A1) in view of Salmela et al. (US 20190387471 A1), Chandrasekhar et al. (US 20200403863 A1) and in further view of Rose et al. (US 20130060669 A1).
Claim 10 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 2, but does not explicitly teach receiving, by the NMS, first intent modification request information from BSS, wherein the first intent modification request information is used to request to modify the first condition information; and updating, by the NMS, the first process based on the first intent modification request information.
From a related technology Rose teaches receiving, by the NMS, first intent modification request information from BSS, wherein the first intent modification request information is used to request to modify the first condition information; and updating, by the NMS, the first process based on the first intent modification request information. (Rose, FIG. 1, ¶0015, receiving a business intent by a financial provider system 105 from a financial institution computer 140; Examiner notes that as the business intent comprises the condition information, this would inherently be functional to modify condition information)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate stopping conditions as described in Rose in order to efficiently utilize network resources.
Claim 11 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 3 but does not explicitly teach receiving, by the NMS, second intent modification request information from the BSS, wherein the second intent modification request information comprises third condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a second constraint that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, and the second constraint is different from the second condition;
obtaining, by the NMS, a fourth execution policy through translation based on the second intent modification request information, wherein the fourth execution policy is used to enable the NMS to perform the management operation on the network, and ensure the second constraint in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network; and
sending, by the NMS, the fourth execution policy to the EMS.
From a related technology, Rose teaches receiving, by the NMS, second intent modification request information from the BSS, (Rose, FIG. 1, ¶0015, receiving a business intent by a financial provider system 105 from a financial institution computer 140; Examiner notes that as the business intent comprises the condition information, this would inherently be functional to modify condition information) wherein the second intent modification request information comprises third condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a second constraint that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, (¶0065, wherein the business rules may comprises a plurality of conditions, i.e. a third or fourth condition) and the second constraint is different from the second condition; (¶0065, wherein each of these conditions or prerequisites are different and must be met before performance of a management operation)
obtaining, by the NMS, a fourth execution policy through translation based on the second intent modification request information, (Rose, FIG. 2, step 225 and 235, ¶0066 and ¶0067, wherein the business rule is translated into policies by determining whether to apply default financial rules, i.e. a fourth execution policy) wherein the fourth execution policy is used to enable the NMS to perform the management operation on the network, and ensure the second constraint in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network; (Examiner notes that the second and third execution policy “is used to enable the NMS… comprises an intended use statement and does not have patentable weight, the claim does not incorporate this NMS performance, so is outside the scope) and
sending, by the NMS, the fourth execution policy to the EMS. (Examiner interprets an “element management system” as being a sub-system of the network management system, i.e. it’s a portion of the network management system that handles elements of the network; Examiner therefore interprets Rose, FIG. 2, step 225 and 235, ¶0066 and ¶0067, as sending the information to the EMS by execution of the determined policy)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate stopping conditions as described in Rose in order to efficiently utilize network resources.
Claim 12 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaching Claim 4, but does not explicitly teach receiving, by the NMS, third intent modification request information from the BSS, wherein the third intent modification request information comprises third condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a third condition that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, and the third condition is different from the second condition;
obtaining, by the NMS, a fifth execution policy through translation based on the third intent modification request information, wherein the fifth execution policy is used to ensure the third condition in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network; and
sending, by the NMS, the fifth execution policy to the EMS.
receiving, by the NMS, third intent modification request information from the BSS, (Rose, FIG. 1, ¶0015, receiving a business intent by a financial provider system 105 from a financial institution computer 140; Examiner notes that as the business intent comprises the condition information, this would inherently be functional to modify condition information) wherein the third intent modification request information comprises third condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a third condition that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, and the third condition is different from the second condition;
obtaining, by the NMS, a fifth execution policy through translation based on the third intent modification request information, (Rose, FIG. 2, step 225 and 235, ¶0066 and ¶0067, wherein the business rule is translated into policies by determining whether to apply default financial rules, i.e. a fourth execution policy) wherein the fifth execution policy is used to ensure the third condition in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network; (Examiner notes that the second and third execution policy “is used to enable the NMS… comprises an intended use statement and does not have patentable weight, the claim does not incorporate this NMS performance) and
sending, by the NMS, the fifth execution policy to the EMS. (Examiner interprets an “element management system” as being a sub-system of the network management system, i.e. it’s a portion of the network management system that handles elements of the network; Examiner therefore interprets Rose, FIG. 2, step 225 and 235, ¶0066 and ¶0067, as sending the information to the EMS by execution of the determined policy)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate stopping conditions as described in Rose in order to efficiently utilize network resources.
Claim 13 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 6, but does not explicitly teach receiving, by the NMS, fourth intent modification request information from the communication service provider, wherein the fourth intent modification request information comprises at least one of third condition information or fourth condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a second constraint that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, the fourth condition information is used to indicate a second prerequisite that the network meets before the NMS performs the management operation on the network, the second constraint is different from the second condition, and the second prerequisite is different from the first condition; and
sending, by the NMS, at least one of the third condition information or the fourth condition information to the EMS.
From a related technology, Rose teaches receiving, by the NMS, fourth intent modification request information from the communication service provider, (Rose, FIG. 1, ¶0015, receiving a business intent by a financial provider system 105 from a financial institution computer 140; Examiner notes that as the business intent comprises the condition information, this would inherently be functional to modify condition information) wherein the fourth intent modification request information comprises at least one of third condition information or fourth condition information, (¶0065, wherein the business rules may comprises a plurality of conditions, i.e. a third or fourth condition) the third condition information is used to indicate a second constraint that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, the fourth condition information is used to indicate a second prerequisite that the network meets before the NMS performs the management operation on the network, the second constraint is different from the second condition, and the second prerequisite is different from the first condition; (¶0065, wherein each of these conditions or prerequisites are different and must be met before performance of a management operation) and
sending, by the NMS, at least one of the third condition information or the fourth condition information to the EMS. (Examiner interprets an “element management system” as being a sub-system of the network management system, i.e. it’s a portion of the network management system that handles elements of the network; Examiner therefore interprets Rose, FIG. 2, step 225 and 235, ¶0066 and ¶0067, as sending the information to the EMS by execution of the determined policy)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate stopping conditions as described in Rose in order to efficiently utilize network resources.
Claim 16 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 14, a but does not explicitly teach sending, by the communication service provider, first intent modification request information to the NMS, wherein the first intent modification request information is used to request to modify the first condition information.
From a related technology, Rose teaches sending, by the communication service provider, first intent modification request information to the NMS, wherein the first intent modification request information is used to request to modify the first condition information. (Rose, FIG. 1, ¶0015, receiving a business intent by a financial provider system 105 from a financial institution computer 140; Examiner notes that as the business intent comprises the condition information, this would inherently be functional to modify condition information)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate stopping conditions as described in Rose in order to efficiently utilize network resources.
Claim 17 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 14, but does not explicitly teach sending, by the communication service provider, second intent modification request information to the NMS, wherein the second intent modification request information comprises third condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a second constraint that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, and the second constraint is different from the second condition.
From a related technology, Rose teaches sending, by the communication service provider, second intent modification request information to the NMS, (Rose, FIG. 1, ¶0015, receiving a business intent by a financial provider system 105 from a financial institution computer 140; Examiner notes that as the business intent comprises the condition information, this would inherently be functional to modify condition information) wherein the second intent modification request information comprises third condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a second constraint that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, (¶0065, wherein the business rules may comprises a plurality of conditions, i.e. a third or fourth condition) and the second constraint is different from the second condition. (¶0065, wherein each of these conditions or prerequisites are different and must be met before performance of a management operation)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate stopping conditions as described in Rose in order to efficiently utilize network resources.
Claim 18 Chen in view of Salmela and Chandrasekhar teaches Claim 14, but does not explicitly teach sending, by the communication service provider, fourth intent modification request information to the NMS, wherein the fourth intent modification request information comprises at least one of third condition information or fourth condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a second constraint that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, the fourth condition information is used to indicate a second prerequisite that the network meets before the NMS performs the management operation on the network, and the second constraint is different from the second condition.
From a related technology, Rose teaches sending, by the communication service provider, fourth intent modification request information to the NMS, (Rose, FIG. 1, ¶0015, receiving a business intent by a financial provider system 105 from a financial institution computer 140; Examiner notes that as the business intent comprises the condition information, this would inherently be functional to modify condition information) wherein the fourth intent modification request information comprises at least one of third condition information or fourth condition information, the third condition information is used to indicate a second constraint that the network meets in the process in which the NMS performs the management operation on the network, the fourth condition information is used to indicate a second prerequisite that the network meets before the NMS performs the management operation on the network, (¶0065, wherein the business rules may comprises a plurality of conditions, i.e. a third or fourth condition) and the second constraint is different from the second condition. (¶0065, wherein each of these conditions or prerequisites are different and must be met before performance of a management operation)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen in view of Salmela to incorporate stopping conditions as described in Rose in order to efficiently utilize network resources.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER PALACA CADORNA whose telephone number is (571)270-0584. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-7:00.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571) 272-3964. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P CADORNA/Examiner, Art Unit 2444
/JOHN A FOLLANSBEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444