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 Amendment
This office action is responsive to amendment filed on 12/10/2025. Claim 11 is amended. Claims 11-19 are pending. Applicant is respectfully requested to cancel the non-elected claims in the next communication.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 11-19 are rejected under 101 because the claimed invention is directed to patent ineligible subject matter. The claims recite a “method”, which falls within the statutory category of “process” under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Step 2A, Prong One, claims 11-19 are directed to judicial exceptions, specifically, abstract idea, the claims are directed to abstract idea , including a mental process such as organizing and categorizing data (AI model components) based on predetermined criteria, which are concepts that can be performed in the human mind or with pen and paper; certain method of organizing human activity such as , managing and distributing computational resources network infrastructure, analogous to conventional business practices of resources allocation and task distribution; mathematical concepts, such as AI models involve mathematical algorithm and computations for artificial intelligence.
Step 2A, prong Two, the claims do not integrate the judicial exceptions into a practical application because the claims do not recite improvement to computer technology, network performance, or telecommunication technology. Despite the claims recite specific network nodes (CN, UPF, RAN, AMF, PCF), these are conventional telecommunications components performing well understood, routine functions. The claims do not require any non-conventional implementation of these components. The claims do not recite transformation of any particular article to a different state or thing. The AI model data remains the unchanged, only location changes through conventional network transmission. The additional elements amount to merely applying the abstract idea in the telecommunications field.
Step 2B, the claims do not recite ab inventive concept sufficient to transform the judicial exceptions into patent eligible because of usage of conventional computer functions, well understood, routine and conventional activities and the use of generic computer implementation. In conclusion claims 11-19 are directed to judicial exceptions that are not integrated into a practical application and lack of inventive concept. The claims merely apply conventional telecommunications network operations to distribute AI model data without providing specific technological improvements or non-conventional implementation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues the following:
The amended claim 1 addresses the problem of strategically distributing AI model components based on computational capabilities of different network nodes and enabling execution of the distributed AI across the network.
Even though the amended claim1 describes distributing portions of an AI model to different network nodes, the clam language does not recite how the distribution is determined based on computational capabilities, nor does it specify a technical mechanism for performing such optimization. The claim recites acquiring, a distributed AI model, transmitting model portions and weights to specified nodes and enabling execution of the distributed model. However, the claim does not recite any of the following: a specific algorithm for determining model partition; a particular resource allocation mechanism, an improvement to network throughput or a technical implementation that improves the functioning of the network itself. Instead, the claim describes distributing and executing a model across network nodes using their conventional communication processing functions. Which is similar to allocation of computational tasks among nodes performed using generic components without specifying a particular technological improvement.
The claims Integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application Under Step 2A Prong Two.
Even though the claim is directed to a communication network environment, the current amended claim language mainly describes transmitting portions of AI model to different network nodes and enabling execution of the of the model across those nodes. The network components appear to perform their normal function, such as receiving, transmitting and executing data. The claim does not describe improvement to how the network itself operates but it only describes using existing network elements to carry out distribution and execution of the model. The currently amended claim is applying the concept of a network setting rather than integrating it into a specific technological improvement to the network.
The office action’s step 2A prong Two Analysis Overlooks the Technical Improvement.
The office action has considered the claim as a whole. Even though the claim is directed to a communication network and refers to AI model portions being distributed across network nodes, the claim does not clearly describe how the network itself is technically improved. The claim recites acquiring a distributed AI model, transmitting portions of te model to different nodes and enabling execution across the network. However, the claim does not explain the following steps: how the model is partitioned in a specific technical way; how network performance is improved or how the operation of the CN, UPF, or RAN nodes are changed or enhanced. Currently, the network nodes appear to be performing their normal role of receiving, transmitting and executing data only without improving the network itself.
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 SARGON N NANO whose telephone number is (571)272-4007. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM. M.S.T..
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571 272 3889. 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.
/SARGON N NANO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443