CTNF 18/390,634 CTNF 93128 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after 16 March 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to Applicant’s submission filed on 26 May 2026. THIS ACTION IS NON-FINAL . . 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to signal per se. Claim 1-10, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. There is no art rejection for claims 1-20. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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. Non-Statutory Subject Matter Claims 11-15 are directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are directed to signal per se. Judicial Exception Claims 1-10, 16-20 of the claimed invention are directed to a judicial exception, an abstract idea, without significantly more. Regarding claims 1-10, (Independent Claims) With regards to claim 1 , the claim recites a machine, which falls into one of the statutory categories. 2A – Prong 1: the claim, in part, recites “… identifying a plurality of states of workload management factors, wherein workload management factors are predefined operational factors that support managing performance optimization of workload processing units; identifying a task associated with a workload processing unit and a full neural network model from a plurality of neural network models; based on the task, the plurality of states of the workload management factors, and the full neural network model, selecting a reduced neural network model from the plurality of neural network models; … determining whether the reduced neural network model meets a predefined performance threshold; and … based on determining that the reduced neural network does not meet the predefined performance threshold, selecting another neural network model from the plurality of neural network models ” (mental process and/or math concept), as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting generic computer elements, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the language about generic computer elements, “identifying”, “selecting”, “determining”, in the limitation citied above encompasses observing / analyzing / selecting data processing models based on performance evaluation, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. 2A – Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of “ A computerized system comprising: one or more computer processors; and computer memory storing computer-useable instructions that, when used by the one or more computer processors, cause the one or more computer processors to perform operations …”, “… causing execution of the task using the reduced neural network model ”, “ based on determining that the reduced neural network meets the predefined performance threshold, maintaining execution of the task with the reduced neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. 2B Analysis: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the additional elements of “ A computerized system comprising: one or more computer processors; and computer memory storing computer-useable instructions that, when used by the one or more computer processors, cause the one or more computer processors to perform operations …”, “… causing execution of the task using the reduced neural network model ”, “ based on determining that the reduced neural network meets the predefined performance threshold, maintaining execution of the task with the reduced neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible. (Dependent claims) With regards to claim 2 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein a workload manager is associated with the workload processing unit to support dynamically switching between the plurality of neural network models based on the workload management factors and a workload management logic ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 3 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein the workload management logic is associated with a first priority type associated with the task and a second priority type associated with the plurality of neural network models ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 4 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein selecting the neural network model from the plurality of neural network models comprises selecting another reduced neural network model or reverting to the full neural network model ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 5 , the claim includes limitation “ further comprising identifying as second full neural network model for optimization of the workload processing unit, wherein the workload processing unit supports the full neural network model and the second full neural network model simultaneously, the full neural network model having a higher optimization priority than the second full neural network model ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 6 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein the plurality of neural network models include a first full neural network model associated with at least two corresponding reduced neural network models and a second full neural network model associated with at least two corresponding reduced neural network models ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 7 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein the workload processing unit is associated with one of the following: an edge device or a cloud computing application ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting for performance optimization, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 8 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein the workload processing unit corresponds to one of the following: a Neural Processing Unit (NPU), a Graphics Processing Units (GPU), or a Tensor Processing Units (TPU) ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting for performance optimization, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 9 , the claim includes limitation “ associating each of the plurality of neural network models with corresponding workload management logic and workload management factors ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting for performance optimization, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea The claim recites additional element of: (a) “ training the plurality of neural network models comprising the full neural network model and the reduced neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f); (b) “ deploying the plurality of neural network models to support workload management comprising dynamically switching between the plurality of neural network models based on their corresponding workload management logic and workload management factors ”, which is field of use and technological environment (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Accordingly, at Step 2A, prong two, the additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. 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, the additional elements of (a) “ training the plurality of neural network models comprising the full neural network model and the reduced neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f); (b) “ deploying the plurality of neural network models to support workload management comprising dynamically switching between the plurality of neural network models based on their corresponding workload management logic and workload management factors ”, which is field of use and technological environment (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Accordingly, at Step 2B the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 10 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein reducing the reduced neural network model is based on one of the following: quantization, pruning, or network architecture selection (NAS) ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting for performance optimization, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea The claim recites additional element of “ wherein training the plurality of neural network models comprises training the full neural network model and training a plurality of reduced neural network models ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, at Step 2A, prong two, the additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. 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, the additional elements of “ wherein training the plurality of neural network models comprises training the full neural network model and training a plurality of reduced neural network models ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, at Step 2B the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible. Regarding claims 16-20, (Independent Claims) With regards to claim 1 , the claim recites a machine, which falls into one of the statutory categories. 2A – Prong 1: the claim, in part, recites “… identifying a plurality of states of workload management factors, wherein workload management factors are predefined operational factors that support managing performance optimization of workload processing units; identifying a task associated with a workload processing unit; based on the task and the plurality of states of the workload management factors, selecting a neural network model from a plurality of neural network models ” (mental process and/or math concept), as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting generic computer elements, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the language about generic computer elements, “identifying”, “selecting”, in the limitation citied above encompasses observing / analyzing / selecting data processing models based on performance evaluation, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. 2A – Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of “ causing the task to be executed using the selected neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. 2B Analysis: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the additional elements of “ causing the task to be executed using the selected neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible. (Dependent claims) With regards to claim 17 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein the workload manager is associated with the workload processing unit to support dynamically switching between the plurality of neural network models based on the workload management factors and a workload management logic ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 18 , the claim includes limitation “ determining whether the neural network model meets a predefined performance threshold ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting for performance optimization, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea The claim recites additional element of “ based on determining that the neural network model meets the predefined performance threshold, maintaining execution of the task with the reduced neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, at Step 2A, prong two, the additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. 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, the additional elements of “ based on determining that the neural network model meets the predefined performance threshold, maintaining execution of the task with the reduced neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, at Step 2B the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 19 , the claim includes limitation “ the method further comprising: determining whether the neural network model meets a predefined performance threshold; and based on determining that the neural network model does not meet the predefined performance threshold, selecting another neural network model from the plurality of neural network models ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 20 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein selecting another neural network model from the plurality of neural network models comprises selecting another reduced neural network model ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. Regarding claims 11-15, the claims are directed to signal per se, which is not one of the patentable categories. For compact persecution, judiciary exception analysis is provided below as the claims include elements directed to abstract idea. (Independent Claims) With regards to claim 11 , 2A – Prong 1: the claim, in part, recites “… identifying a plurality of states of workload management factors, wherein workload management factors are predefined operational factors that support managing performance optimization of workload processing units; identifying a task associated with a workload processing unit; based on the task and the plurality of states of the workload management factors, selecting a neural network model from a plurality of neural network models ” (mental process and/or math concept), as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting generic computer elements, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the language about generic computer elements, “identifying”, “selecting”, in the limitation citied above encompasses observing / analyzing / selecting data processing models based on performance evaluation, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. 2A – Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of: (a) “ One or more computer-storage media having computer-executable instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by a computing system having a processor and memory, cause the processor to perform operations ”, “ training a plurality of neural network models comprising a full neural network model and a reduced neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)); (b) “ deploying the plurality of neural network models to support workload management comprising dynamically switching between the plurality of neural network models based on the their corresponding workload management logic and workload management factors ”, which is field of use and technological environment (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Accordingly, the additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. 2B Analysis: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the additional elements of (a) “ One or more computer-storage media having computer-executable instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by a computing system having a processor and memory, cause the processor to perform operations ”, “ training a plurality of neural network models comprising a full neural network model and a reduced neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)); (b) “ deploying the plurality of neural network models to support workload management comprising dynamically switching between the plurality of neural network models based on the their corresponding workload management logic and workload management factors ”, which is field of use and technological environment (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Accordingly, the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible. (Dependent claims) With regards to claim 12 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein training the plurality of neural network models comprises training the full neural network model and training a plurality of reduced neural network models, wherein reducing the reduced neural network model is based on one of the following: quantization, pruning, or network architecture selection (NAS) ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 13 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein the plurality of neural network models include a first full neural network model associated with at least two corresponding reduced neural network models and a second full neural network model associated with at least two corresponding reduced neural network models ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 14 , the claim includes limitation “ wherein each of the at least two corresponding reduced neural network models of the first full neural network model are associated with a different reduction strategy ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Except citing generic computer elements to implement the abstract idea, there is no additional element showing integration into a practical application or adding something significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible. With regards to claim 15 , the claim includes limitation “ the operations further comprising: identifying a plurality of states of workload management factors; identifying a task associated with a workload processing unit; based on the task and the plurality of states of the workload management factors, selecting a neural network model from a plurality of neural network models ” (mental process and/or math concept), which is further process of data processing model observing / analyzing / selecting for performance optimization, which is based on observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion, that could be performed by human using paper / pen / calculator. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea The claim recites additional element of “ causing the task to be executed using the selected neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, at Step 2A, prong two, the additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. 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, the additional elements of “ causing the task to be executed using the selected neural network model ”, which is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, at Step 2B the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 include allowable subject matter since when reading the claims in light of the specification, as per, MPEP §2111.01 or Toro Co. v. White Consolidated Industries Inc., 199F.3d 1295, 1301, 53 USPQ2d 1065, 1069, 1069 (Fed.Cir. 1999), none of the references of record alone or in combination disclose or suggest the combination of limitations specified in claims 1-20. In interpreting the claims, in light of the specification filed on 20 December 2023, the Examiner finds the claimed invention to be patentably distinct from the prior arts of record. Regarding the amended independent claims, the primary reason for the allowance is the inclusion of the specific claimed process / structure of analyzing / identifying workload based on operational factors to select / train neural network models for optimizing performance . None of the cited prior art references, singly or in combination, fully teaches all limitations of independent claims 1, 11, and 16. Regarding the dependent claims, which include all the limitations of the independent claims, are also allowed. The followings are references close to the invention claimed: Dong et al., US-PGPUB NO.20250190267A1 [hereafter Dong] teaches dynamical resource allocation for runtime workload optimization. However Dong does not teach the specific claimed process / structure of analyzing / identifying workload based on operational factors to select / train neural network models for optimizing performance . Fairuz et al., US-PGPUB NO.20230290485A1 [hereafter Fairuz] teaches using AI model for performance optimization. However Friruz does not teach the specific claimed process / structure of analyzing / identifying workload based on operational factors to select / train neural network models for optimizing performance . Jiang et al., US-PGPUB NO.20250190316A1 [hereafter Jiang] teaches adaptive workload management. However Jiang does not teach the specific claimed process / structure of analyzing / identifying workload based on operational factors to select / train neural network models for optimizing performance . Jiang et al., US-PATENT NO.11928513B1 [hereafter Jiang] teaches dynamical workload evaluation. However Jiang does not teach the specific claimed process / structure of analyzing / identifying workload based on operational factors to select / train neural network models for optimizing performance . Kumar et al., “HPCWMF: a hybrid predictive cloud workload management framework using improved LSTM neural network”, Cybernetics and information technologies, Vol. 20, No.4, 2020 [hereafter Kumar] teaches workload management using neural network. However Kumar does not teach the specific claimed process / structure of analyzing / identifying workload based on operational factors to select / train neural network models for optimizing performance . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSU-CHANG LEE whose telephone number is 571-272-3567. The fax number is 571-273-3567. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Omar Fernandez Rivas, can be reached 571-272-2589. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /TSU-CHANG LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 2 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 3 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 4 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 5 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 6 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 7 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 8 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 9 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 10 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 11 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 12 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 13 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 14 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 15 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 16 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 17 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 18 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 19 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 20 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 21 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 22 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 23 Art Unit: 2128 Application/Control Number: 18/390,634 Page 24 Art Unit: 2128
Prosecution Insights