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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed, 12 June 2026, of application filed, with the above serial number, on 22 December 2022 in which claims 1-2, 12-13, 20 have been amended and claim 10 cancelled. Claims 1-9, 11-20 are pending in the application.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tregenza Dancer et al (hereinafter “Tregenza”, 2015/0067178) in view of Nanda et al (hereinafter “Nanda”, 2019/0243802).
As per Claim 1, Tregenza discloses a location server communicatively coupled to a telecommunications network comprising a clustered Application Server (AS) comprising nodes storing configuration data to process a call or other communication request associated with a query for a subscriber of the telecommunications network, the location server comprising:
at least one network interface; a processor; a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, perform operations comprising:
receive, via an interface of the at least one network interface, a query for a subscriber (at least paragraph 45; a request message being transmitted from user device 120 to network routing node 104, as shown by item 202. Upon receipt of the communication session setup message, network routing node 104 transmits a query in relation to the communication session involving the given subscriber to location database and failure manager node 110);
in response to determining that a configuration associated with the subscriber is on a failed AS node of the clustered AS (at least paragraph 45-47; query of item 106 is received by location database and failure manager node 110 and in response to the list indicating that the first communication session server CSS1 in the plurality which is currently responsible for providing communication services to the given subscriber currently has a failed state, location database and failure manager node 110 conducts a responsibility transfer operation to transfer responsibility for providing communication services to the given subscriber from the first communication session server CSS1 to a second, different communication session server in the plurality); wherein determining that the configuration associated with the subscriber is on the failed AS node comprises identifying, based on a table stored by the location server that associates subscriber identifiers with respective AS nodes, an AS node associated with an identifier of the subscriber, and determining that a connection via the at least one network interface to the identified AS node is unavailable (at least paragraph 50, 31-32; due to a network event that means that communication session server CSS1 is disconnected from all or part of the surrounding network; which means that location database and failure management node 110 becomes aware of the inactive state of communication session server CSS1; A list of which communication session servers in the plurality are currently in an active state and which are currently in a failed state):
determine a healthy AS node of the clustered AS (at least paragraph 46);
send a request, via an interface of the at least one network interface, for the healthy AS node to instantiate a configuration block containing configuration data associated with the subscriber, and wherein at least one additional configuration block associated with the failed AS node is not included in the set required to process the query (at least paragraph 45-47; location database and failure manager node 110 chooses to transfer responsibility for providing communication services to the given subscriber to CSS2, i.e. the given subscriber is transferred to CSS2…responsibility transfer operation can also be referred to as a re-homing operation or a re-instantiation operation; just-in-time rehoming of subscriber configuration data such that only the subscriber data is instantiated on new node; paragraph 52, 40, 105; using “just in time” rehoming of configuration data to a new server rather than switching over of a whole communication session server's worth of configuration and the associated processing to a new replacement communication session server is carried out); and
receive a response, via the interface of the at least one network interface, from the healthy AS node indicative that an identifier, associated with the subscriber has been registered on the healthy AS node (at least paragraph 45-47; conducting the responsibility transfer operation comprises location database and failure manager node 110 instructing (as shown by item 208) the second communication session server CSS2 to retrieve (as shown by item 210) subscriber configuration data for the given subscriber from subscriber configuration data node 114 and store the retrieved subscriber configuration data for the given subscriber locally for use in providing communication services to the given subscriber);
respond, via an interface of the at least one network interface, to the query with the location of the healthy AS node after the configuration blocks have been instantiated and before all configuration blocks in a queue have been instantiated (at least paragraph 45-47; Once the second communication session server CSS2 has retrieved the subscriber configuration data for the given subscriber from subscriber configuration data node 114, communication session server CSS2 is ready to start providing communication services to the given subscriber when required, i.e. communication session server CSS2 is now responsible for providing communication services to the given subscriber; communication session server CSS2 informs location database and failure manager node 110 of such; paragraph 52, 40, 105; using “just in time” rehoming of configuration data to a new server rather than switching over of a whole communication session server's worth of configuration and the associated processing to a new replacement communication session server is carried out).
Tregenza fails to disclose such instantiation being for a first parent configuration block upon which the child configuration block is dependent, wherein the child configuration block and the first parent configuration block constitute a dependency set required to process the query; after responding to the query, add, by the location server, one or more configuration blocks previously stored on, or associated with, the failed AS node to the queue for requesting the healthy AS node to instantiate each configuration block of the queue, the one or more remaining configuration blocks excluding the first parent configuration block and the child configuration block that were requested to be instantiated for the query; and request the healthy AS node to instantiate at least one configuration block from the queue before receiving a subsequent query for which the at least one configuration block from the queue is required.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Nanda. Nanda discloses in an analogous data storage art, a failback procedure where a source configuration file system is migrated to a destination by way of a user file system (child) being unmounted then serially the configuration and root (parent) file system, and mounting on the destination the root file system, configuration and user file system (at least Nanda paragraph 15-21). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Nanda’s disclosure of conventional technology as Nanda teaches it being well known that where there exists a dependency on a file system, all file systems that depend on each other would need to be migrated and file dependencies are well known in the art.
Further, Tregenza discloses (see at least paragraph 69, 84-85, 52, 40, 105) using “just in time” rehoming of configuration data to a new server rather than switching over of a whole communication session server's worth of configuration and the associated processing to a new replacement communication session server is carried out. And such “re-instantiation (i.e. rehoming of a subscriber to a different communication session server) is carried out "just-in-time", the rate at which this operation needs to be supported is naturally limited by the rate of events arriving from the network (e.g. new SIP calls). Embodiments therefore have a benefit in overall performance over a scheme where the failure of the communication session server itself triggers a bulk operation to rehome subscribers; New instantiations of subscribers within a site are load balanced amongst communication session servers in the plurality in a weighted fashion based on their currently reported available capacity; location database and failure management node 110 sends it a request to pull the relevant copy of the given subscriber's configuration from the configuration backup store 114 and is able to start providing service to that subscriber when a communication session involving the subscriber is subsequently initiated”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the alternative option in Tregenza, as Tregenza teaches just in time offers performance gain however queueing other subscribers’ data from a failed server to a healthy server offers alternative benefits such as those other subscribers not having any interruption or ‘small one-off delay” (par. 49).
As per Claim 2. The location server of claim 1, wherein the at least one remaining configuration blocks added to the queue comprise one or more of:
a configuration block of a parent-child structure comprising the first parent configuration block; at least one additional parent configuration block including a root of the parent-child structure; or a child configuration block associated with any one or more of the first parent configuration block or the additional parent configuration block (at least Nanda paragraph 15-21).
As per Claim 3. The location server of claim 1, the instructions executable to iteratively request, via the at least one network interface, the healthy AS node to instantiate each configuration block of the queue (at least paragraph 105).
As per Claim 4. The location server of claim 1, wherein the queue is a first queue, the instructions further executable to at least one of:
move a configuration block of the first queue to a second queue; or
move a configuration block of the second queue to the first queue, wherein each configuration block of the second queue is configured to be requested, via the at least one network interface, to be instantiated by the healthy AS node before any block of the first queue (at least Nanda paragraph 15-21).
As per Claim 5. The location server of claim 4, wherein a configuration block of the first queue is moved to the second queue using a determined priority of the configuration block, wherein a higher priority configuration block is moved to the second queue before a lower priority configuration block, and wherein a configuration block of the second queue is moved to the first queue using a determined priority of the configuration block, wherein a lower priority configuration block is moved to the first queue before a higher priority block (at least Nanda paragraph 15-21; unmount and mount serially in order of priority for user, configuration and root data).
As per Claim 6. The location server of claim 5, wherein the priority of a configuration block is determined based on one or more of: whether a subscriber associated with the configuration block is currently attempting to make a call via the telecommunications network, whether the configuration block is associated with configuration of a business group comprising subscribers, whether the configuration block has any dependencies, whether the configuration block is a dependency for another configuration block, a number of dependents of the configuration block, the priority of any dependents of the configuration block, a type of the configuration block, historical data regarding a subscriber associated with the configuration block, or existence of a provisioning request for the block (at least Nanda paragraph 15-21; unmount and mount serially in order of priority for user, configuration and root data).
As per Claim 7. The location server of claim 6, wherein the type of the configuration block is one of: line; Private Branch Exchange, PBX; or multi-line hunt group (at least paragraph 11, 26, 47; voice session /call/ line).
As per Claim 8. The location server of claim 1, the instructions executable to further: in response to requesting the healthy AS node to instantiate a configuration block failing, reattempt to request the healthy AS node to instantiate the configuration block (at least paragraph 46, 44, 32, 39; heartbeat mechanism to determine health of server(s)).
As per Claim 11. The location server of claim 1, wherein the clustered AS registers subscriber identifiers with the location server such that the location server stores a table comprising, for each subscriber identifier, an associated location of a AS node of the clustered AS upon which configuration data associated with the subscriber is stored (at least paragraph 31-33).
As per Claim 18. The method of claim 12, wherein receiving a query for a subscriber comprises: receiving the query as part of a communications flow; or receiving the query to read or change configuration of the subscriber as part of a provisioning flow (at least paragraph 34; initiation results in a request message being transmitted from user device 120 to network routing node 104 (possibly via one or more other entities), as shown by item 102. Upon receipt of the communication session setup message, network routing node 104 transmits a query in relation to the communication session involving the given subscriber to location database and failure manager node 110, as shown by item 106. The query of item 106 queries which communication session server in the plurality is currently responsible for providing communication services). .
As per Claim 19. The method of claim 12, comprising: receiving a first query for a subscriber as part of a communications flow and receiving a second query to read or change configuration of the subscriber or another subscriber as part of a provisioning flow (at least paragraph 34-36; initiation results in a request message being transmitted from user device 120 to network routing node 104 …Communication session server CSS1 then processes the request message in relation to the communication session according to subscriber configuration data it has stored locally for the given subscriber).
Claims 12-17, 20 do not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claims 1-8, 11 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons, supra.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tregenza in view of Nanda, further in view of Kukreja et al (hereinafter “Kukreja”, 11,050,618).
Tregenza discloses in at least paragraph 44: “communication session server CSS1 fails, location database and failure manager node 110 learns of such failure as shown by item 204, for example by location database and failure manager node 110 not receiving an expected heartbeat signal from communication session server CSS1 in a timely fashion. Location database and failure manager node 110 therefore updates the maintained list to indicate that communication session server CSS1 is currently in a failed state. Location database and failure manager node 110 does not carry out any responsibility transfer operations for subscribers from communication session server CSS1 to one or more different communication session servers at this stage”. Tregenza fails to explicitly disclose:
the instructions executable to further: in response to requesting the healthy AS node to instantiate a configuration block failing less than a predetermined number of times, reattempt to request the healthy AS node to instantiate the configuration block; and in response to requesting the healthy AS node to instantiate a configuration block failing more than a predetermined number of times, add the configuration block to a failure queue, wherein each configuration block of the failure queue is configured to be requested to be instantiated after at least one other queue is clear of blocks.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Kukreja (at least col. 7:1-18). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Kukreja’s failure queue and retry count with Tregenza and Nanda, as such retrying is well known in the art as illustrated by Kukreja, and Tregenza teaches a heartbeat mechanism to determine the health of a server and migrating to CSS2 if CSS2 is determined to be healthy and if that fails after a certain number of attempts then try CSS3, etc.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed12 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Tregenza does not disclose a dependency aware staged instantiation process of a child and parent configuration block being required for query processing, another block being omitted, and answering the query before other blocks are instantiated.
However, Tregenza is exactly teaching such limitations as amended in claim 1, whereas in at least paragraphs 69, 84-85, Tregenza teaches “re-instantiation (i.e. rehoming of a subscriber to a different communication session server) is carried out "just-in-time", the rate at which this operation needs to be supported is naturally limited by the rate of events arriving from the network (e.g. new SIP calls). Embodiments therefore have a benefit in overall performance over a scheme where the failure of the communication session server itself triggers a bulk operation to rehome subscribers”.
Tregenza teaches “New instantiations of subscribers within a site are load balanced amongst communication session servers in the plurality in a weighted fashion based on their currently reported available capacity”. And Tregenza teaches “location database and failure management node 110 sends it a request to pull the relevant copy of the given subscriber's configuration from the configuration backup store 114 and is able to start providing service to that subscriber when a communication session involving the subscriber is subsequently initiated”.
Thus, Tregenza teaches that there is no bulk rehoming transfer, only minimal rehoming as needed, rather the rehoming is performed in real time as the subscriber makes a call and the configuration data is needed. The specification does not clearly describe ‘dependency relationships’ but it is assumed that such describes a dependent configuration block related to an independent or other dependent blocks.
Thus, Tregenza discloses that only the configuration of the requested subscriber is rehomed, no other configuration blocks, and other configuration blocks of other subscribers are “queued” for such just in time rehoming when they are requested. As such ‘queue’ would only hold data that is needed to be transferred or rehomed but has not yet, Tregenza’s other subscribers configuration data is queued therein.
In this case, Tregenza teaches rehoming all configuration data for a subscriber when they make a call, such configuration data being non-dependent or independent of other subscribers data, with Nanda teaching the different transfer of data on root and dependent on root data, or parent and child configuration data. Tregenza teaches all configuration data is rehomed that the subscriber would need for the communication session, thus any data and dependent data.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Tregenza is not relied on for teaching the parent and child configuration block instantiation, Nanda is the prior art for such limitations.
Applicant also argues Nanda not teaching a telecommunications location server, see p. 15 of arguments.
Applicant’s arguments rely on language solely recited in preamble recitations in claim(s) 1. When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation a location server communicatively coupled to a telecommunications network is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Tregenza is relied on for most of the limitations that Applicant argues Nanda not disclose.
In summary, Tregenza teaching rehoming configuration data just in time as the data is needed from a subscriber call or query. Applicant argues such is not what is claimed, however the claims pre-amendment recited such prioritized rehoming, the specification (see for example par. 24-30) recites such terminology, the claims are amended in order to not have different terminology, however the functionality and end result is the same. Tregenza teaches rehoming configuration data all under the assumption that the failed server will become available again and thus conserving resources to not rehome data that would not be needed before the failed server comes online again. However, as is well known in the art, some failed servers fail and do not come online again and there is a need to have the data from a failed server be transferred to a new operational server. It would be obvious that using Nanda’s migration of server data would alleviate such possibility, as is well known. And thus, Tregenza in view of Nanda would result in the obvious combination of having Tregenza’s configuration data rehomed just in time as it is needed and then migrating the remainder of the data in due time, and if another subscriber having configuration data on the failed server needs their configuration data rehomed subsequently, it would similarly be rehomed, with the migration continuing in the background, as such migrations are well known to take very long amounts of time and subscribers may need their configuration data immediately in order to place a VoIP call, for example.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is indicated in PTO form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY TODD whose telephone number is (303)297-4763. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5 MST.
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 on 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.
/GREGORY TODD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights