Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on or reply to the remarks of 3/31/2026. The instant application has claims 21-40 pending. The system, method and medium for choosing an application functionality configuration based on resource conditions for application session. There a total of 20 claims.
Response to Arguments
The attorney has presented amendments do not narrow the scope of the claims, it merely presents the same subject matter previously presented in different form, e.g. reduced mode being changed to first operating mode. The examiner indicated the same issue during the interview with the attorney and asked for more features be incorporated see Interview Summary of 3/10/2026. The attorney also agreed that he will consider adding more limitations, but seeing this reply, it leads one to believe the attorney is being deceptive and disingenuous. Thus, the attorney has not made any attempt to advance prosecution but only dragged out and unnecessarily prolonged the prosecution as well as increase cost to the applicant.
Nevertheless, the applicant argues that Huang does not disclose server selecting the operating mode. And further argues that cited prior art fails to disclose the determining the application server.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Huang discloses first application operating mode via partial rendered and that is determined by the intermediate node dynamically see Col 4 Ln 24-39 & Col 4 Ln 56-60. And further the rendering is optimized with application server available by the intermediate node see Col 4 Ln 61-63 & Col 5 Ln 41-62.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 21-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Pub 2007/0022426 to Steinder in view US Patent 6438576 to Huang.
Regarding claim 21, 28, 35, Steinder discloses A method performed by a server device, the method comprising:
receiving, by the server device, an activation request for instantiating an application session between an application server and a client application operating on a user equipment(Fig. 1 item 110, the request for application from different nodes & Par. 0019);
extracting, by the server device from an application record associated with the activation request for instantiating the application session instantiation request, application capacity requirements corresponding to an application associated with the application session(Fig. 2 item 220, the application resource requirements and instances are determined);
determining, by the server device, resource conditions associated with one or more application servers, the determined resource conditions corresponding to available application server resources(Fig. 2 item 240, the current placement is determined & Par. 008);
subsequent to determining the resource conditions, accessing a library module comprising a plurality of application operating modes for the application session, each application operating mode comprising resource condition requirements(Par. 0019);
subsequent to selecting the first application operating mode, determining, by the server
device, at least one application server of the one or more application servers having a capacity that satisfies the first application operating server capacity requirement of the first application operating mode(Fig. 1 item 160, application demand estimators & Fig. 2 item 220-230); and
But Steinder does not disclose selecting, by the server device, a first application operating mode of the plurality of application operating modes for which the determined resource conditions of the one or more application servers satisfy a resource condition requirement of the first application operation mode.
However, Huang discloses selecting, by the server device, a first application operating mode of the plurality of application operating modes for which the determined resource conditions of the one or more application servers satisfy a resource condition requirement of the first application operation mode(Col 8 Ln 11-49, the rendering is based what is needed by proxy server & Col 4 Ln 24-39 & Col 4 Ln 56-60), the first application operating mode corresponding to a first application operating mode of the application disablement of one or more functions of the application(Col 4 Ln 8-39, the intermediate nodes reduces the rendering based on node conditions & Col 7 Ln 42-Col 8 Ln 10, partial rendering); or a first application operating server capacity requirement distinct from a full capacity mode of the application(Col 3 Ln 14-459, the partial rendering and staged for reducing the load & Col 8 Ln 4-11, the complete or partial rendering & Col 4 Ln 61-63 & Col 5 Ln 41-62.); and based on the determination of the at least one application server, causing the instantiation of the application session using the first application operating mode of the application at the determined at least one application server(Col 4 Ln 24-39 & Col 4 Ln 56-60)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Steinder invention to incorporate first mode with disablement of functions the advantage of reducing the load on server and dynamically allocating resources as taught in Huang see Col 8 Ln 50-66.
Regarding claim 22. Huang discloses The method of claim 21, wherein: the application capacity requirements comprise a set of functional features(Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29); and the selected application functionality configuration comprises substantially all functional features of the application and corresponds to a maximum bandwidth requirement of the particular application (Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29 , the requested oject is checked if lightly loaded)
Regarding claim 23. Huang discloses The method of claim 21, wherein: the particular application capacity requirements comprise a set of functional features; and the selected particular application functionality configuration comprises a subset of functional features from the set of functional features, the subset of functional features having a bandwidth requirement less than a maximum bandwidth requirement of the particular application (Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29 & Col 8 LN 36-49, the lightly loaded software)
Regarding claim 24. Huang discloses The method of claim 21, wherein: the particular application capacity requirements comprise a set of functional features(Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29); and the selected particular application functionality configuration comprises a subset of functional features from the set of functional features, the subset of functional features having a bandwidth requirement that corresponds to a minimum bandwidth requirement of the particular application (Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29 & & Col 8 LN 36-49, the lightly loaded software)
Regarding claim 25. Steinder discloses The method of claim 21, comprising: in response to a selection of the particular application functionality configuration, receiving from the user equipment, a tailored activation request, the tailored activation request comprising particular application capacity requirements associated with the selected particular application functionality configuration(Fig. 1 item 160 & Fig. 2, the application requirements is matched with current placement)
Regarding claim 26. Huang discloses The method of claim 21, wherein: the selection of the particular application functionality configuration is based at least in part on payment information associated with the particular application (Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29 & Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 Ln 7, the rendering based on request)
Regarding claim 27. Steinder discloses The method of claim 21, wherein: a first operating mode of the plurality of application operating modes comprises a first bandwidth requirement (Fig. 1 item 160 & Fig. 2, the application requirements is matched with current placement); a second operating mode of the plurality of application operating modes comprises a second bandwidth requirement less than the first bandwidth requirement (Fig. 1 item 160 & Fig. 2, the application requirements is matched with current placement); a third operating mode of the plurality of application operating modes comprises a third bandwidth requirement less than the second bandwidth requirement (Fig. 1 item 160 & Fig. 2, the application requirements is matched with current placement); and the selection of the particular application functionality configuration is based at least in part on a highest bandwidth requirement that is below a threshold capacity of the one or more particular application servers(Fig. 1 item 160 & Fig. 2, the application requirements is matched with current placement)
Regarding claim 29. Huang discloses The method of claim 28, wherein: the plurality of available modes further comprise a full mode, a partial mode, and a fast mode(Col 13 Ln 35-59, the slave devices needed for completing the service and sub-services, different slaves are used based on parameters & Col 9 Ln 29-36, the rendering is limited or fully rendered); the full mode corresponds to a set of functionalities corresponding to substantially all functionalities of the particular application ; (Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29, the rendering is limited or fully rendered); the partial mode corresponds to a first subset of functionalities less than the set of functionalities associated with the full mode(Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29, the rendering is limited or fully rendered); and the fast mode corresponds to a second subset of functionalities different from the first subset of functionalities, the fast mode is configured to use less network bandwidth than each of the full mode and the partial mode(Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29)
Regarding claim 30. Huang discloses The method of claim 29, wherein: the first particular application record further comprises particular application identification, application type, quality of service, bandwidth capacity requirements, and average packet size Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 ln 52); and at least one data field from the plurality of available operating modes changes in accordance with first application operating mode (Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 ln 52)
Regarding claim 31. Huang discloses The method of claim 29, wherein: the plurality of available modes further comprise an enhanced mode configured to utilize an additional set of resources from the selected application server, the additional set of resources greater than a set of resources corresponding to the full mode(Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29).
Regarding claim 32. Huang discloses The method of claim 28, comprising: in accordance with selecting the first available mode, tailoring the activation request based on the queried application server conditions (Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 ln 52, conditions of the servers is part of decision to render).
Regarding claim 33. Huang discloses The method of claim 28, comprising: receiving acknowledgment that the application session has been activated(Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 ln 52)
Regarding claim 34. Huang discloses The method of claim 28, wherein: the queried application server conditions includes: at least one of an available bandwidth associated with the application server of the set of application servers; an average delay associated with the application server of the set of application servers; an average packet size associated with the application server of the set of application servers; or an average data rate associated with the application server of the set of application servers (Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 ln 52 & Fig. 1, proxy and clients ).
Regarding claim 36, Huang discloses The method of claim 35, wherein: the plurality of application operating modes comprise a full functionality configuration, a partial functionality configuration, and a fast functionality configuration (Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 ln 52); and each operating mode of the plurality of application operating modes comprise corresponds to a unique combination of application record parameters Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 ln 52)
Regarding claim 37. Steinder discloses The method of claim 36, wherein: the full functionality configuration includes a first bandwidth requirement(Fig. 1 item 160 & Fig. 2, the application requirements is matched with current placement); the partial functionality configuration includes a second bandwidth requirement less than the first bandwidth requirement; and the fast functionality configuration includes a third bandwidth requirement less than the second bandwidth requirement (Fig. 1 item 160 & Fig. 2, the application requirements is matched with current placement)
Regarding claim 38. Huang discloses The method of claim 37, wherein: the first functionality configuration is the fast functionality configuration(Col 3 Ln 38-Col 4 ln 52); and the application server conditions does not satisfy required computing resources associated with application instances different from the first application instance (Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29)
Regarding claim 39. Huang discloses The method of claim 35, wherein: the selection of the first functionality configuration is based at least in part on payment information associated with the application(Col 7 Ln 43-Col 8 Ln 29)
Regarding claim 40. Steinder discloses The method of claim 35, wherein: the application session correspond to a real-time video application (Par.0112-0114, minimizing load and satisfying the requirements); and the plurality of application operating modes includes: quality of service capacity requirements, bandwidth capacity requirements; maximum delay capacity requirements; and jitter capacity requirements (Par.0112-0114, minimizing load and satisfying the requirements)
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 Venkat Perungavoor whose telephone number is (571)272-7213. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Rupal Dharia can be reached on 571-272-3880. 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.
/VENKAT PERUNGAVOOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2492 Email: venkatanarayan.perungavoor@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights