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 .
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.
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/281,454 filed on 11 September 2023. The response filed 25 May 2026 amends claims 1, 10, 19, and 20, cancels claims 21-30, and presents arguments is hereby acknowledged. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
The response filed 25 May 2026 addresses the 35 USC 101 rejections made on the 4 March 2026 Non-Final Rejection. Applicant’s amendments, regarding the 35 USC 101 rejections, are considered. Applicant argues that the claims have been significantly amended. Further, Applicant argues that these rejections are moot and reconsideration is respectfully requested. Applicant argues that the amended expression “to a network management system to enable corrective action on the telecommunication node” is directed to an improvement in telecommunications network monitoring technology that is clearly integrated in a practical application. Further, Applicant argues that by reciting that the anomaly is reported "to a network management system to enable corrective action on the telecommunication node", the claim ties the mathematical analysis to a concrete technical purpose of improving network operations. Examiner respectfully disagrees and find this argument unpersuasive. Regarding step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, the invention is directed toward a method, another method, a telecommunication node, and an apparatus. Regarding Prong 1 of Step 2A, the claims recite an abstract idea of using mathematical relationships to make a determination in a telecommunication node. Regarding Prong 2 of Step 2A, the claims recite additional elements that the Applicant claims integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The amended limitation recites “reporting the anomaly when the measurement of the KPI is outside of the confidence band to a network management system to enable corrective action on the telecommunication node.” The amended expression indicates that the telecommunication node reports the anomaly to enable corrective action. This expression recites a high level of generality and does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. At best, the telecommunication node is the general/standard device used in a telecommunications environment. Further, enabling corrective action is a solution recited at a high level of generality and is the general/standard goal of network analysis. Thus, these claims are directed to an abstract idea and are not eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101. Therefore, all outstanding 35 USC 101 rejections are hereby maintained.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1, 10, 19, and 20 recite “obtaining a measurement of a key performance indicator (KPI) of the telecommunication node; upon receiving the measurement of the KPI, updating coefficients of a polynomial function; based on the updated coefficients of the polynomial function, computing an expected measurement of the KPI coefficient; computing a confidence band for the expected measurement of the KPI; and reporting the anomaly when the measurement of the KPI is outside of the confidence band to a network management system to enable corrective action on the telecommunication node.” The limitations of “obtaining a measurement of a key performance indicator (KPI) of the telecommunication node; upon receiving the measurement of the KPI, updating coefficients of a polynomial function; based on the updated coefficients of the polynomial function, computing an expected measurement of the KPI coefficient; computing a confidence band for the expected measurement of the KPI; and reporting the anomaly when the measurement of the KPI is outside of the confidence band to a network management system to enable corrective action on the telecommunication node,” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers “mathematical relationships” but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “of the telecommunication node” and “to a network management system” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being a mathematical relationship. For example, but for the recitation of generic computer components, the context of this claim encompasses using node data for a mathematical relationship. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites two additional elements – the telecommunication node and the network management system. The telecommunication node and the network management systems are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a device) such that it amounts to no more than two devices. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a telecommunication node amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception “to enable corrective action” using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 2 and 11 recite “wherein initial coefficients of the polynomial function are computed based on M initial measurements of the KPI and the coefficients a are computed using: a = polyfit(x[O:M], y[O:M], degree) where polyfit is a function that computes the coefficients using a least square method, x is the time at which is taken the measurement of the KPI, y is the measurement of the KPI and degree is the degree of the polynomial function.” Coefficients of a polynomial function is an additional element of the abstract idea of the mathematical relationship. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 3 and 12 recite “wherein updating the coefficients of the polynomial function comprises, for each of the coefficients of the polynomial function: computing a loss function for the measurement of the KPI; computing a gradient of the loss function; and updating the coefficient as a function of the gradient of the loss function.” Updating coefficients of a polynomial function is an additional element of the abstract idea of the mathematical relationship. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 4 and 13 recite “wherein computing the confidence band comprises: computing an average and a standard deviation for the expected measurement of the KPI based on previous measurements; and setting the confidence band to minus three times the standard deviation from the average to plus three times the standard deviation from the average.” Applying an average and a standard deviation are additional elements of the abstract idea of the mathematical relationship. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 5 and 14 recites “wherein the confidence band is computed for each measurement of the KPI in the time series and includes computing the average and the standard deviation.” Applying an average and a standard deviation are additional elements of the abstract idea of the mathematical relationship. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 6 and 15 recites “wherein computing the average and the standard deviation is based on a predetermined number of most recent previous measurements which does not include all the previous measurements.” Applying an average and a standard deviation are additional elements of the abstract idea of the mathematical relationship. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 7 and 16 recite “wherein the polynomial function is a 7th order polynomial function.” The degree of the polynomial function is an additional element of the abstract idea of the mathematical relationship. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 8 and 17 recite “wherein computing the loss function for the measurement of the KPI is done using: L(a,,xi, yi) = |P(xi)-yi|2, where L is the loss function, a is the coefficient of the polynomial function, yi is the data point, P(a, xi) is the expected measurement of the KPI and i is an index of the measurement of the KPI.” Elements of a polynomial function is an additional element of the abstract idea of the mathematical relationship. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 9 and 18 recite “wherein computing the gradient of the loss function is done using: ∇aiL(xi) = 2 (xi) |P(xi) - yi| where L is the loss function, xi is the time at which is taken the measurement of the KPI, yi is the measurement of the KPI, P(xi) is the expected measurement of the KPI and i is an index of the measurement of the KPI.” Calculating a gradient is an additional element of the abstract idea of the mathematical relationship. The claim is not patent eligible.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US PGPUB 2020/0252310 A1 to Thampy et al discloses outlier detection in a network assurance service.
US PGPUB 2022/0103421 A1 to Singh et al discloses healing faulty nodes in a network.
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 SCHQUITA GOODWIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5477. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm EST.
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, Tonia Dollinger can be reached on (571) 272-4170. 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.
/SCHQUITA D GOODWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459
Prosecution Insights